linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] at73c213: Fix DMA size at the end of DMA buffer

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]

Message-Id: <20080314.222932.74752532.anemo@mba.ocn.ne.jp>
Date:	Fri, 14 Mar 2008 22:29:32 +0900 (JST)
From:	Atsushi Nemoto <anemo@....ocn.ne.jp>
To:	haavard.skinnemoen@...el.com
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, hcegtvedt@...el.com,
	avictor.za@...il.com, tiwai@...e.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH] at73c213: Fix DMA size at the end of DMA buffer

On Fri, 14 Mar 2008 10:44:45 +0100, Haavard Skinnemoen <haavard.skinnemoen@...el.com> wrote:
> > +		size = runtime->period_size * runtime->channels;
> > +		if (next_period == runtime->periods - 1)
> > +			size += (runtime->buffer_size % runtime->period_size)
> > +				* runtime->channels;
> 
> Ow. That looks expensive. Isn't there any way we can force the client
> to select sane values of buffer_size and period_size?

Well, I suppose it is not _too_ expensive. :)

> It seems like a reasonable demand that buffer_size is a multiple of
> period_size, doesn't it?

But actually it can happen.  And I gave up understanding how are these
parameters determined...  If there were any way the driver can enforce
that constraint, it would be better fix.

Iwai-san, any comments from alsa guru?

---
Atsushi Nemoto
--
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/