From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/4] ASoc: kirkwood: simplify probe error
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 2013 13:46:52 +0100
Message-ID: <20130803124652.GY23006@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk>
References: <20130731081739.76aae84c@armhf>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <alsa-devel-bounces@alsa-project.org>
Received: from caramon.arm.linux.org.uk (caramon.arm.linux.org.uk
 [78.32.30.218]) by alsa0.perex.cz (Postfix) with ESMTP id E80D7260202
 for <alsa-devel@alsa-project.org>; Sat,  3 Aug 2013 14:47:04 +0200 (CEST)
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20130731081739.76aae84c@armhf>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://mailman.alsa-project.org/mailman/options/alsa-devel>,
 <mailto:alsa-devel-request@alsa-project.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://mailman.alsa-project.org/pipermail/alsa-devel/>
List-Post: <mailto:alsa-devel@alsa-project.org>
List-Help: <mailto:alsa-devel-request@alsa-project.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://mailman.alsa-project.org/mailman/listinfo/alsa-devel>,
 <mailto:alsa-devel-request@alsa-project.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: alsa-devel-bounces@alsa-project.org
Sender: alsa-devel-bounces@alsa-project.org
To: Jean-Francois Moine <moinejf@free.fr>
Cc: devicetree@vger.kernel.org, alsa-devel@alsa-project.org, Takashi Iwai <tiwai@suse.de>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@gmail.com>, Rob Herring <rob.herring@calxeda.com>, Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
List-Id: alsa-devel@alsa-project.org

On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 08:17:39AM +0200, Jean-Francois Moine wrote:
> The function kirkwood_i2s_dev_remove() may be used when probe fails.

Looking at this deeper, I'm not happy with this.

> +static int kirkwood_i2s_dev_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
> +{
> +	struct kirkwood_dma_data *priv = dev_get_drvdata(&pdev->dev);
> +
> +	snd_soc_unregister_component(&pdev->dev);
...
> @@ -519,30 +532,17 @@ static int kirkwood_i2s_dev_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>  
>  	err = snd_soc_register_component(&pdev->dev, &kirkwood_i2s_component,
>  					 soc_dai, 1);
> +	if (err) {
> +		dev_err(&pdev->dev, "snd_soc_register_component failed\n");
> +		goto fail;
> +	}
> +	return 0;
>  
> +fail:
> +	kirkwood_i2s_dev_remove(pdev);

What this means is that if snd_soc_register_component() fails, we end
up calling snd_soc_unregister_component().  This may be fine with the
way snd_soc_unregister_component() is currently implemented, but you're
making the assumption that it's fine to call snd_soc_unregister_component()
for a device which hasn't been registered.  Technically, this is a
layering violation, which makes this change fragile if the behaviour
of snd_soc_unregister_component() changes in the future.

For the sake of two calls in the error path, I don't think the benefits
of this patch outweigh the risk.