| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20120611085404.GB11439@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>
Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2012 16:54:05 +0800
From: Mark Brown <broonie@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com>
To: Tomoya MORINAGA <tomoya.rohm@...il.com>
Cc: Vinod Koul <vinod.koul@...ux.intel.com>,
alsa-devel@...a-project.org, lars@...afoo.de,
Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.de>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Liam Girdwood <lrg@...com>
Subject: Re: [alsa-devel] [PATCH v5] sound/soc/lapis: add platform driver for
ML7213
On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 04:05:56PM +0900, Tomoya MORINAGA wrote:
> That is to say, some drivers ASoC DMA framework. However some drivers
> don't use any ASoC DMA framework.
There are some drivers that predate the availibility of the dmaengine
framework.
> Why didn't you do porting to your saying "ASoC DMA framework"?
This, and the fact that the PCH driver uses dmaengine without using any
shared code, is the topic of the discussion. It is entirely natural
that there are no open coded drivers using cyclic DMA via dmaengine,
they have all had that code factored out.
Please stop this and at least look at factoring this code out. If it
turns out that there's some reason why it's a lot of work that's one
thing but it seems clear that you've not even looked yet. It's like the
previous issues where you were sending patches which would clearly not
run successfully, it's not a very positive approach.
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (837 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists