At Thu, 09 Aug 2012 15:26:56 +0200,
David Henningsson wrote:
>
> On 08/09/2012 03:11 PM, Takashi Iwai wrote:
>
> > @@ -3187,13 +3217,16 @@ static int __devinit azx_probe(struct pci_dev *pci,
> > if (patch[dev] && *patch[dev]) {
> > snd_printk(KERN_ERR SFX "Applying patch firmware '%s'\n",
> > patch[dev]);
> > - err = request_firmware(&chip->fw, patch[dev], &pci->dev);
> > + err = request_firmware_nowait(THIS_MODULE, true, patch[dev],
> > + &pci->dev, GFP_KERNEL, card,
> > + azx_firmware_cb);
> > if (err < 0)
> > goto out_free;
> > + chip->probe_deferred = 1;
>
> I might be out on deep water here, but isn't this racy? Or is
> azx_firmware_cb somehow guaranteed not to execute before this function
> has exited?
chip->probe_deferred is used only at the line below.
So basically it's not necessarily to be recorded in chip, but could be
a local bool variable in azx_probe(). It remains in chip just because
of my older patch had it.
>
> > }
> > #endif /* CONFIG_SND_HDA_PATCH_LOADER */
> >
> > - if (!chip->disabled) {
> > + if (!chip->disabled && !chip->probe_deferred) {
Here it's checked.
Takashi
> > err = azx_probe_continue(chip);
> > if (err < 0)
> > goto out_free;
> >
>
>
>
> --
> David Henningsson, Canonical Ltd.
> https://launchpad.net/~diwic
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
