Hi Laurent, On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 03:52:02PM +0300, Laurent Pinchart wrote: > Hi Sakari, > > On Tuesday, 19 September 2017 15:04:43 EEST Laurent Pinchart wrote: > > Hi Sakari, > > > > Thank you for the patch. > > > > On Friday, 15 September 2017 17:17:12 EEST Sakari Ailus wrote: > > > The information on how many async sub-devices would be bindable to a > > > notifier is typically dependent on information from platform firmware and > > > it's not driver's business to be aware of that. > > > > > > Many V4L2 main drivers are perfectly usable (and useful) without async > > > sub-devices and so if there aren't any around, just proceed call the > > > notifier's complete callback immediately without registering the notifier > > > itself. > > > > > > If a driver needs to check whether there are async sub-devices available, > > > it can be done by inspecting the notifier's num_subdevs field which tells > > > the number of async sub-devices. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Sakari Ailus <sakari.ai...@linux.intel.com> > > > Acked-by: Hans Verkuil <hans.verk...@cisco.com> > > > > Reviewed-by: Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinch...@ideasonboard.com> > > I take this back. > > > > --- > > > > > > drivers/media/v4l2-core/v4l2-async.c | 6 ++++-- > > > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/media/v4l2-core/v4l2-async.c > > > b/drivers/media/v4l2-core/v4l2-async.c index 9895b610e2a0..4be2f16af051 > > > 100644 > > > --- a/drivers/media/v4l2-core/v4l2-async.c > > > +++ b/drivers/media/v4l2-core/v4l2-async.c > > > @@ -170,14 +170,16 @@ int v4l2_async_notifier_register(struct v4l2_device > > > *v4l2_dev, struct v4l2_async_subdev *asd; > > > > > > int i; > > > > > > - if (!v4l2_dev || !notifier->num_subdevs || > > > - notifier->num_subdevs > V4L2_MAX_SUBDEVS) > > > + if (!v4l2_dev || notifier->num_subdevs > V4L2_MAX_SUBDEVS) > > > > > > return -EINVAL; > > > > > > notifier->v4l2_dev = v4l2_dev; > > > INIT_LIST_HEAD(¬ifier->waiting); > > > INIT_LIST_HEAD(¬ifier->done); > > > > > > + if (!notifier->num_subdevs) > > > + return v4l2_async_notifier_call_complete(notifier); > > > + > > This skips adding the notifier to the notifier_list. Won't this result in an > oops when calling list_del(¬ifier->list) in > v4l2_async_notifier_unregister() ?
Good point. I'll add initialising the list head to the register function, with an appropriate comment. > > > > for (i = 0; i < notifier->num_subdevs; i++) { > > > > > > asd = notifier->subdevs[i]; > -- Regards, Sakari Ailus e-mail: sakari.ai...@iki.fi