Web lists-archives.com

Re: PM regression in next




On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 01:07:06PM -0800, Tony Lindgren wrote:

> (twl4030_dummy_read [snd_soc_twl4030]) from [<bf1cc3b4>]
>   (snd_soc_codec_drv_read+0x1c/0x28 [snd_soc_core])
> (snd_soc_codec_drv_read [snd_soc_core]) from [<bf1da1cc>]
>   (snd_soc_dapm_new_widgets+0x29c/0x578 [snd_soc_core])
> (snd_soc_dapm_new_widgets [snd_soc_core]) from [<bf1d2f30>]
>   (snd_soc_register_card+0xad0/0xe30 [snd_soc_core])
> (snd_soc_register_card [snd_soc_core]) from [<bf1e1850>]
>   (devm_snd_soc_register_card+0x30/0x70 [snd_soc_core])
> (devm_snd_soc_register_card [snd_soc_core]) from [<bf234364>]
>   (omap_twl4030_probe+0x100/0x1d0 [snd_soc_omap_twl4030])
> (omap_twl4030_probe [snd_soc_omap_twl4030]) from [<c0606660>]
>   (platform_drv_probe+0x50/0xb0)

So does the read not happen otherwise?  Or is it failing somehow and the
error getting ignored?

> So probably there are other asoc drivers broken too with these
> kind of patches until snd_soc_codec_drv_write() and
> snd_soc_codec_drv_read() are fixed?

I rather suspect someone would've noticed by now TBH - I suspect this is
more likely to be an issue with the rather baroque code that the TWL
drivers have possibly coupled with the whole multiple I2C devices issue.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature