| Message ID | 87pnlj2ih6.wl-kuninori.morimoto.gx@renesas.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | ASoC: cleanup patches for soc-core | expand |
On Tue, 2019-08-06 at 10:28 +0900, Kuninori Morimoto wrote: > From: Kuninori Morimoto <kuninori.morimoto.gx@renesas.com> > > snd_soc_add_component_controls() registers controls by using > for(... i < num; ...). If controls was NULL, num should be zero. > Thus, we don't need to check about controls pointer. > > Signed-off-by: Kuninori Morimoto <kuninori.morimoto.gx@renesas.com> > --- > sound/soc/soc-core.c | 7 +++---- > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/sound/soc/soc-core.c b/sound/soc/soc-core.c > index bdd6a2e..7be8385 100644 > --- a/sound/soc/soc-core.c > +++ b/sound/soc/soc-core.c > @@ -1304,10 +1304,9 @@ static int soc_probe_component(struct > snd_soc_card *card, > } > } > > - if (component->driver->controls) > - snd_soc_add_component_controls(component, > - component->driver- > >controls, > - component->driver- > >num_controls); > + snd_soc_add_component_controls(component, > + component->driver->controls, > + component->driver- > >num_controls); Should the return value be checked? Thanks, Ranjani > if (component->driver->dapm_routes) > snd_soc_dapm_add_routes(dapm, > component->driver->dapm_routes,
diff --git a/sound/soc/soc-core.c b/sound/soc/soc-core.c index bdd6a2e..7be8385 100644 --- a/sound/soc/soc-core.c +++ b/sound/soc/soc-core.c @@ -1304,10 +1304,9 @@ static int soc_probe_component(struct snd_soc_card *card, } } - if (component->driver->controls) - snd_soc_add_component_controls(component, - component->driver->controls, - component->driver->num_controls); + snd_soc_add_component_controls(component, + component->driver->controls, + component->driver->num_controls); if (component->driver->dapm_routes) snd_soc_dapm_add_routes(dapm, component->driver->dapm_routes,