| Message ID | 20230125194649.3485731-1-amadeuszx.slawinski@linux.intel.com |
|---|---|
| Headers | show |
| Series | ASoC: topology: Fixes and cleanups | expand |
On 1/25/23 13:46, Amadeusz Sławiński wrote: > Functions removing bytes, enum and mixer kcontrols are identical. Unify they are identical because of the change in patch10. Please clarify that this is not a cleanup removing duplicated code that's been there forever, it's become useless as a result of the previous patch. > them under one function and use it to free associated kcontrols. > > Reviewed-by: Cezary Rojewski <cezary.rojewski@intel.com> > Signed-off-by: Amadeusz Sławiński <amadeuszx.slawinski@linux.intel.com> > --- > sound/soc/soc-topology.c | 48 +++++----------------------------------- > 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 42 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/sound/soc/soc-topology.c b/sound/soc/soc-topology.c > index eb49037d86ae..e66b0d9e387a 100644 > --- a/sound/soc/soc-topology.c > +++ b/sound/soc/soc-topology.c > @@ -350,41 +350,9 @@ static int soc_tplg_add_kcontrol(struct soc_tplg *tplg, > tplg->dev, k, comp->name_prefix, comp, kcontrol); > } > > -/* remove a mixer kcontrol */ > -static void soc_tplg_remove_mixer(struct snd_soc_component *comp, > - struct snd_soc_dobj *dobj, int pass) > -{ > - struct snd_card *card = comp->card->snd_card; > - > - if (pass != SOC_TPLG_PASS_CONTROL) > - return; > - > - if (dobj->unload) > - dobj->unload(comp, dobj); > - > - snd_ctl_remove(card, dobj->control.kcontrol); > - list_del(&dobj->list); > -} > - > -/* remove an enum kcontrol */ > -static void soc_tplg_remove_enum(struct snd_soc_component *comp, > - struct snd_soc_dobj *dobj, int pass) > -{ > - struct snd_card *card = comp->card->snd_card; > - > - if (pass != SOC_TPLG_PASS_CONTROL) > - return; > - > - if (dobj->unload) > - dobj->unload(comp, dobj); > - > - snd_ctl_remove(card, dobj->control.kcontrol); > - list_del(&dobj->list); > -} > - > -/* remove a byte kcontrol */ > -static void soc_tplg_remove_bytes(struct snd_soc_component *comp, > - struct snd_soc_dobj *dobj, int pass) > +/* remove kcontrol */ > +static void soc_tplg_remove_kcontrol(struct snd_soc_component *comp, struct snd_soc_dobj *dobj, > + int pass) > { > struct snd_card *card = comp->card->snd_card; > > @@ -2626,14 +2594,10 @@ int snd_soc_tplg_component_remove(struct snd_soc_component *comp) > list) { > > switch (dobj->type) { > - case SND_SOC_DOBJ_MIXER: > - soc_tplg_remove_mixer(comp, dobj, pass); > - break; > - case SND_SOC_DOBJ_ENUM: > - soc_tplg_remove_enum(comp, dobj, pass); > - break; > case SND_SOC_DOBJ_BYTES: > - soc_tplg_remove_bytes(comp, dobj, pass); > + case SND_SOC_DOBJ_ENUM: > + case SND_SOC_DOBJ_MIXER: > + soc_tplg_remove_kcontrol(comp, dobj, pass); > break; > case SND_SOC_DOBJ_GRAPH: > soc_tplg_remove_route(comp, dobj, pass);
On Wed, 2023-01-25 at 20:46 +0100, Amadeusz Sławiński wrote: > Following is series of fixes and cleanups for core topology code. Few > patches fixing various problems all around and few fixing function > names. > > Amadeusz Sławiński (11): > ASoC: topology: Properly access value coming from topology file > ASoC: topology: Remove unused SOC_TPLG_PASS_PINS constant > ASoC: topology: Fix typo in functions name > ASoC: topology: Fix function name > ASoC: topology: Rename remove_ handlers > ASoC: topology: Remove unnecessary forward declarations > ASoC: topology: Pass correct pointer instead of casting > ASoC: topology: Return an error on complete() failure > ASoC: Topology: Remove unnecessary check for EOF > ASoC: topology: Use unload() op directly > ASoC: topology: Unify kcontrol removal code LGTM, thanks, Amadeusz! Reviewed-by: Ranjani Sridharan <ranjani.sridharan@linux.intel.com>
On 1/25/2023 4:15 PM, Pierre-Louis Bossart wrote: > > > On 1/25/23 13:46, Amadeusz Sławiński wrote: >> Functions removing bytes, enum and mixer kcontrols are identical. Unify > > they are identical because of the change in patch10. > > Please clarify that this is not a cleanup removing duplicated code > that's been there forever, it's become useless as a result of the > previous patch. > There is no dependency on previous patch - it is just order I've send them in - those functions have same implementation in current code.
On 1/27/23 05:12, Amadeusz Sławiński wrote: > On 1/25/2023 4:15 PM, Pierre-Louis Bossart wrote: >> >> >> On 1/25/23 13:46, Amadeusz Sławiński wrote: >>> Functions removing bytes, enum and mixer kcontrols are identical. Unify >> >> they are identical because of the change in patch10. >> >> Please clarify that this is not a cleanup removing duplicated code >> that's been there forever, it's become useless as a result of the >> previous patch. >> > > There is no dependency on previous patch - it is just order I've send > them in - those functions have same implementation in current code. Not following, sorry. What is this addition in patch 10? diff --git a/include/sound/soc-topology.h b/include/sound/soc-topology.h index b4b896f83b94..f055c6917f6c 100644 --- a/include/sound/soc-topology.h +++ b/include/sound/soc-topology.h @@ -62,7 +62,7 @@ struct snd_soc_dobj { enum snd_soc_dobj_type type; unsigned int index; /* objects can belong in different groups */ struct list_head list; - struct snd_soc_tplg_ops *ops; + int (*unload)(struct snd_soc_component *comp, struct snd_soc_dobj *dobj); That's not in 'current code', is it? How is this not a dependency?
On 1/27/2023 2:38 PM, Pierre-Louis Bossart wrote: > > > On 1/27/23 05:12, Amadeusz Sławiński wrote: >> On 1/25/2023 4:15 PM, Pierre-Louis Bossart wrote: >>> >>> >>> On 1/25/23 13:46, Amadeusz Sławiński wrote: >>>> Functions removing bytes, enum and mixer kcontrols are identical. Unify >>> >>> they are identical because of the change in patch10. >>> >>> Please clarify that this is not a cleanup removing duplicated code >>> that's been there forever, it's become useless as a result of the >>> previous patch. >>> >> >> There is no dependency on previous patch - it is just order I've send >> them in - those functions have same implementation in current code. > > Not following, sorry. What is this addition in patch 10? > > diff --git a/include/sound/soc-topology.h b/include/sound/soc-topology.h > index b4b896f83b94..f055c6917f6c 100644 > --- a/include/sound/soc-topology.h > +++ b/include/sound/soc-topology.h > @@ -62,7 +62,7 @@ struct snd_soc_dobj { > enum snd_soc_dobj_type type; > unsigned int index; /* objects can belong in different groups */ > struct list_head list; > - struct snd_soc_tplg_ops *ops; > + int (*unload)(struct snd_soc_component *comp, struct snd_soc_dobj *dobj); > > That's not in 'current code', is it? How is this not a dependency? It only depends on it because of order I did changes in, but there is really no dependency here. I will send v2 with reversed order.