Re: [PATCH v5 7/9] media: adv748x: only activate DAI if it is described in device tree

From: Alex Riesen <alexander.riesen@cetitec.com>
To: Kieran Bingham <kieran.bingham@ideasonboard.com>
Cc: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>,
	Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@kernel.org>,
	Hans Verkuil <hverkuil-cisco@xs4all.nl>,
	Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com>,
	Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
	Kuninori Morimoto <kuninori.morimoto.gx@renesas.com>,
	devel@driverdev.osuosl.org, linux-media@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-renesas-soc@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 7/9] media: adv748x: only activate DAI if it is described in device tree
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 2020 11:10:52 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200619091052.GB7780@pflmari> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <c752ea76-c8da-c77a-104f-9163230cc08a@ideasonboard.com>

Kieran Bingham, Thu, Jun 18, 2020 18:17:04 +0200:
> On 02/04/2020 19:34, Alex Riesen wrote:
> > To avoid setting it up even if the hardware is not actually connected
> > to anything physically.
> > 
> > Besides, the bindings explicitly notes that port definitions are
> > "optional if they are not connected to anything at the hardware level".
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Alexander Riesen <alexander.riesen@cetitec.com>
> > ---
> >  drivers/media/i2c/adv748x/adv748x-dai.c | 5 +++++
> >  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/media/i2c/adv748x/adv748x-dai.c b/drivers/media/i2c/adv748x/adv748x-dai.c
> > index 185f78023e91..f9cc47fa9ad1 100644
> > --- a/drivers/media/i2c/adv748x/adv748x-dai.c
> > +++ b/drivers/media/i2c/adv748x/adv748x-dai.c
> > @@ -216,6 +216,11 @@ int adv748x_dai_init(struct adv748x_dai *dai)
> >  	int ret;
> >  	struct adv748x_state *state = adv748x_dai_to_state(dai);
> >  
> > +	if (!state->endpoints[ADV748X_PORT_I2S]) {
> > +		adv_info(state, "no I2S port, DAI disabled\n");
> > +		ret = 0;
> > +		goto fail;
> 
> How about just 'return 0'?

Indeed. In the retrospect, the whole event of loading the DAI driver does not
feel that important anymore to warrant logging on info prio.

> Reviewed-by: Kieran Bingham <kieran.bingham+renesas@ideasonboard.com>
> 
> This could also be folded into 5/9 too I guess?, though it is easier to
> review the sequential additions, rather than the one-big-feature
> addition ;-)

I would prefer to have it separately, if you don't mind: maybe not a big one,
but loading a driver without hardware for it *is* an event.

Thanks,
Alex