Re: [PATCH 0/3] ASoC: cs35l41/cs35l45/cs4265: sort the reg_defaults tables
Charles Keepax <[email protected]> Wed, 5 Aug 2026 12:31:27 +0100
| Newsgroups | org.kernel.vger.linux-sound,org.kernel.vger.stable |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On Wed, Aug 05, 2026 at 02:25:52PM +0300, Péter Ujfalusi wrote: > > > On 05/08/2026 13:36, Richard Fitzgerald wrote: > > On 05/08/2026 11:17 am, Péter Ujfalusi wrote: > >> > >> > >> On 05/08/2026 13:10, Charles Keepax wrote: > >>>>> I don't think we need to sort them. Just fail, so that an unsorted > >>>>> table > >>>>> must be fixed. > >>>> > >>>> That would be a big regression all around the place, ordering w/ the > >>>> debug message if developer is interested is much better. > >>> > >>> I think I would come down between the two of you. I definitely > >>> agree with Richard on don't sort them, just encourages drivers to > >>> be wrong. But I also agree with you, don't hard fail. I would > >>> vote for just print an error message and carry on. That way no > >>> regressions, but also a nice big warning message to let people > >>> know what is wrong when they see problems. > >> > >> I usually try to avoid alarming/annoying users with error messages, on > >> the other hand I agree that w/o some pressure, these will never be > >> corrected at root either ;) > >> > >> On the yet another hand, if the regcache have means to fix this, it > >> might be put into use as well. > >> A dev_warn at max to get attention or info level perhaps and fixing it > >> up? > >> > > I asked Codex (GPT5) to search for all reg_default tables with out-of > > order entries or duplicate entries, looking only at those assigned to > > struct regmap_config.reg_defaults (some reg_defaults tables are used for > > patching - those are allowed to be out-of-order). > > > > It came up with this: > > > > Restricting results to tables referenced by struct > > regmap_config.reg_defaults, 39 files violate the rule: > > and some of these have duplicate addresses with different default values. > > I can send more fixes while I'm at this for the clear cases, for Cirrus, > Realtek and TI I have sent few patches. > I was just having a look at cs42l43 so you can skip that one unless you already fixed it up. Thanks, Charles