[PATCH v1 1/1] ASoC: SOF: probes: Check ops before memory allocation

[PATCH v1 1/1] ASoC: SOF: probes: Check ops before memory allocation

[Andy Shevchenko]

We may check ops before spending resources on memory allocation.
While at it, utilize dev_get_platdata() helper.

Signed-off-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
---
 sound/soc/sof/sof-client-probes.c | 14 ++++++--------
 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)

diff --git a/sound/soc/sof/sof-client-probes.c b/sound/soc/sof/sof-client-probes.c
index d08395182b1a..fff126808bc0 100644
--- a/sound/soc/sof/sof-client-probes.c
+++ b/sound/soc/sof/sof-client-probes.c
@@ -399,23 +399,21 @@ static int sof_probes_client_probe(struct auxiliary_device *auxdev,
 	if (!sof_probes_enabled)
 		return -ENXIO;
 
-	if (!dev->platform_data) {
+	ops = dev_get_platdata(dev);
+	if (!ops) {
 		dev_err(dev, "missing platform data\n");
 		return -ENODEV;
 	}
-
-	priv = devm_kzalloc(dev, sizeof(*priv), GFP_KERNEL);
-	if (!priv)
-		return -ENOMEM;
-
-	ops = dev->platform_data;
-
 	if (!ops->startup || !ops->shutdown || !ops->set_params || !ops->trigger ||
 	    !ops->pointer) {
 		dev_err(dev, "missing platform callback(s)\n");
 		return -ENODEV;
 	}
 
+	priv = devm_kzalloc(dev, sizeof(*priv), GFP_KERNEL);
+	if (!priv)
+		return -ENOMEM;
+
 	priv->host_ops = ops;
 
 	switch (sof_client_get_ipc_type(cdev)) {
-- 
2.35.1

Re: [PATCH v1 1/1] ASoC: SOF: probes: Check ops before memory allocation

[Péter Ujfalusi]

On 17/11/2022 12:32, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> We may check ops before spending resources on memory allocation.

we might.

Acked-by: Peter Ujfalusi <peter.ujfalusi@linux.intel.com>

> While at it, utilize dev_get_platdata() helper.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
> ---
>  sound/soc/sof/sof-client-probes.c | 14 ++++++--------
>  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/sound/soc/sof/sof-client-probes.c b/sound/soc/sof/sof-client-probes.c
> index d08395182b1a..fff126808bc0 100644
> --- a/sound/soc/sof/sof-client-probes.c
> +++ b/sound/soc/sof/sof-client-probes.c
> @@ -399,23 +399,21 @@ static int sof_probes_client_probe(struct auxiliary_device *auxdev,
>  	if (!sof_probes_enabled)
>  		return -ENXIO;
>  
> -	if (!dev->platform_data) {
> +	ops = dev_get_platdata(dev);
> +	if (!ops) {
>  		dev_err(dev, "missing platform data\n");
>  		return -ENODEV;
>  	}
> -
> -	priv = devm_kzalloc(dev, sizeof(*priv), GFP_KERNEL);
> -	if (!priv)
> -		return -ENOMEM;
> -
> -	ops = dev->platform_data;
> -
>  	if (!ops->startup || !ops->shutdown || !ops->set_params || !ops->trigger ||
>  	    !ops->pointer) {
>  		dev_err(dev, "missing platform callback(s)\n");
>  		return -ENODEV;
>  	}
>  
> +	priv = devm_kzalloc(dev, sizeof(*priv), GFP_KERNEL);
> +	if (!priv)
> +		return -ENOMEM;
> +
>  	priv->host_ops = ops;
>  
>  	switch (sof_client_get_ipc_type(cdev)) {

-- 
Péter

Re: [PATCH v1 1/1] ASoC: SOF: probes: Check ops before memory allocation

[Mark Brown]

On Thu, 17 Nov 2022 12:32:23 +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> We may check ops before spending resources on memory allocation.
> While at it, utilize dev_get_platdata() helper.
> 
> 

Applied to

   broonie/sound.git for-next

Thanks!

[1/1] ASoC: SOF: probes: Check ops before memory allocation
      commit: 82b21ca1912723a53534086864ee0daceb604cb5

All being well this means that it will be integrated into the linux-next
tree (usually sometime in the next 24 hours) and sent to Linus during
the next merge window (or sooner if it is a bug fix), however if
problems are discovered then the patch may be dropped or reverted.

You may get further e-mails resulting from automated or manual testing
and review of the tree, please engage with people reporting problems and
send followup patches addressing any issues that are reported if needed.

If any updates are required or you are submitting further changes they
should be sent as incremental updates against current git, existing
patches will not be replaced.

Please add any relevant lists and maintainers to the CCs when replying
to this mail.

Thanks,
Mark