Re: [PATCH 07/15] ASoC: SDCA: Rely less on the ASoC component in IRQ handling

["Liao, Bard" <yung-chuan.liao@linux.intel.com>]

On 9/8/2025 10:43 PM, Charles Keepax wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 08, 2025 at 01:56:57PM +0100, Charles Keepax wrote:
>> On Mon, Sep 08, 2025 at 06:27:40PM +0800, Liao, Bard wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On 9/5/2025 10:31 PM, Charles Keepax wrote:
>>>> In the future some IRQs (mostly File DownLoad) will need to run before
>>>> the soundcard is constructed, as such refactor more of the IRQ handling
>>>> to use raw device and regmap pointers rather than accessing things
>>>> through the component.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Charles Keepax <ckeepax@opensource.cirrus.com>
>>>> ---
>>>
>>>> -int sdca_irq_data_populate(struct snd_soc_component *component,
>>>> +int sdca_irq_data_populate(struct device *dev, struct regmap *regmap,
>>>> +			   struct snd_soc_component *component,
>>>>  			   struct sdca_function_data *function,
>>>>  			   struct sdca_entity *entity,
>>>>  			   struct sdca_control *control,
>>>>  			   struct sdca_interrupt *interrupt)
>>>>  {
>>>> -	struct device *dev = component->dev;
>>>
>>> Previously, we assume 'component' will never be null.
>>>
>>>>  	const char *name;
>>>>  
>>>> +	if (!dev && component)
>>>
>>> But now we test 'component'. If we don't assume 'component' is not null
>>> any more, we could test 'component' at the very beginning of this function.
>>
>> Good spot, that was missed when moving from an older version of
>> the code. I will get that fixed up.
> 
> Apologies I had slightly misinterpretted this, and thought you
> meant we were dereferencing component before testing it in
> sdca_irq_data_populate, but we arn't.

No, my question is about whether component can be NULL.

> 
> The intention of this patch is to allow the user to call
> scda_irq_data_populate with or without a component. If you call
> it with a component and pass NULL for dev/regmap it will use the
> component for those. If you pass dev/regmap, it is fine to pass
> NULL for component, the current user doesn't do this but the user
> added later in the series will.

Understood. I had the question because the change below.

+	interrupt->dev = dev;
+	if (!regmap && component)
+		interrupt->function_regmap = component->regmap;
+	else
+		interrupt->function_regmap = regmap;

If both regmap and component are null, the interrupt->function_regmap
will be NULL. Is it valid?

> 
> Thanks,
> Charles
>