linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 3/4] ALSA: line6: Pass driver name to line6

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Fri, 06 Feb 2015 18:23:38 +0100
From:	Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.de>
To:	Chris Rorvick <chris@...vick.com>
Cc:	alsa-devel@...a-project.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] ALSA: line6: Pass driver name to line6_probe()

At Fri, 06 Feb 2015 16:04:42 +0100,
Takashi Iwai wrote:
> 
> At Fri,  6 Feb 2015 08:51:11 -0600,
> Chris Rorvick wrote:
> > 
> > Provide a descriptive name for each driver instead of calling all of
> > them "line6usb".
> 
> This needs to be done carefully.  This string is referred in alsa-lib
> to pick up the the configuration file.  So, this change shall break
> the compatibility.
> 
> If we ever want to pick up a different alsa-lib configuration
> depending on each line6 driver type, then yes, we should give the
> individual driver name.  If we want to keep rather the common
> configuration file (so far there is none, but if any in furture), then
> we should keep the common driver name.
> 
> And, the decision must be done now.  From now on, basically we are not
> allowed to break the user-space compatibility.  That is, this is the
> very last chance to do it.
> 
> If your patch is supposed to do it with these consideration, I'm
> willing to take.  But, I guess it's not, because you chose the string
> like "Line 6 POD".  This is usually not ideal as a driver name; think
> of $DRIVER.conf file that is used for alsa-lib configuration.
> 
> So, from that POV, "line6usb" is no bad name string.  If we want
> differentiate per driver, a name like "Line6-Pod" or just "Pod" would
> be more appropriate.

Just to make sure: I'm not against giving own driver name for each
line6 driver.  I myself think it'd be rather better than the single
common name for long term.  But, the name string should be more usable
as a file name, i.e. without space and just two words or so.


Takashi
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/