Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 18 Sep 2014 17:01:25 +0530 | From | Sudip Mukherjee <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v2] sound: pci: ctxfi: pr_* replaced with dev_* |
| |
On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 12:21:20PM +0200, Takashi Iwai wrote: > At Thu, 18 Sep 2014 14:51:26 +0530, > Sudip Mukherjee wrote: > > > > On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 08:17:52PM +0200, Takashi Iwai wrote: > > > At Mon, 15 Sep 2014 20:55:54 +0530, > > > Sudip Mukherjee wrote: > > > > > > > > On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 04:29:48PM +0200, Takashi Iwai wrote: > > > > > At Mon, 15 Sep 2014 19:39:41 +0530, > > > > > Sudip Mukherjee wrote: > > <snip> > > > > > > > > > > > > diff --git a/sound/pci/ctxfi/ctresource.c b/sound/pci/ctxfi/ctresource.c > > > > > > index e49d2be..80beecb 100644 > > > > > > --- a/sound/pci/ctxfi/ctresource.c > > > > > > +++ b/sound/pci/ctxfi/ctresource.c > > > > > (snip) > > > > > > @@ -282,8 +287,9 @@ int rsc_mgr_uninit(struct rsc_mgr *mgr) > > > > > > case SUM: > > > > > > break; > > > > > > default: > > > > > > - pr_err("ctxfi: Invalid resource type value %d!\n", > > > > > > - mgr->type); > > > > > > + dev_err(&(((struct hw *)mgr->hw)->pci->dev), > > > > > > + "ctxfi: Invalid resource type value %d!\n", > > > > > > + mgr->type); > > > > > > > > > > Did you really conclude that this is the best way? > > > > > Also, is it good to mix up the usages of both card->dev and &pci->dev? > > > > > Think again. > > > > > > > > > > > > > i have a doubt regarding this :- > > > > in the snd_card_new() card->dev is being assigned with &pci->dev , > > > > then are not they the same ? > > > > > > Yes, but how can it be guaranteed in future? We may avoid the > > > problems in future by keeping the consistency at this moment. It's > > > one of the good points of keeping code consistent, in addition to: > > > increased readability / understandability and making the bug easier to > > > be spotted. > > > > understood the point. > > > > > > > i was trying to get some way of finding out the reference of card->dev from the resource manager , > > > > but ... :( > > > > i will try again and if i cant find any way i will ask for some hint from you. > > > > > > Good! A hint is that there is no 100% perfect way to achieve this. > > > It's always compromise, and you'll have to choose which one is better > > > than others. For that, you'll have to evaluate multiple > > > implementations, and it's a really good exercise for coding. > > > > > > > i can find the rsc_mgr from the snd_card or ct_atc > > but if i want to find the reference to the device from the managers , then > > either i can go with > > 1) &(((struct hw *)mgr->hw)->pci->dev) > > or > > 2) use pci_get_drvdata with ((struct hw *)mgr->hw)->pci > > or > > 3) using container_of with &(((struct hw *)mgr->hw)->pci->dev) to find the pointer to snd_card via card_dev , but it becomes too complicated :( > > > > we can get to all the managers (rsc_mgr, amixer_mgr, src_mgr ...) using atc->rsc_mgrs[] , then there should be some simple way to go > > the opposite way (reaching atc from the managers) . container_of will not work .. :( > > or am i missing something?? > > Adding a new field pointing to card to each struct.
i seriously did not think of that , i was under the impression that a newbie is not supposed to change or add to the designs. anyways, i feel that i understand the code a little better than what i understood at the the time of my first patch. and definitely your "writing-an-alsa-driver" has helped a lot .
thanks sudip > > > Takashi
| |