linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 08/10] ASoC: ux500_pcm: Differentiate between pdata and DT initialisation

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: <20131119184829.GF2674@sirena.org.uk>
Date:	Tue, 19 Nov 2013 18:48:29 +0000
From:	Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To:	Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>
Cc:	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linus.walleij@...aro.org, alsa-devel@...a-project.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 08/10] ASoC: ux500_pcm: Differentiate between pdata and
 DT initialisation

On Tue, Nov 19, 2013 at 11:07:47AM +0000, Lee Jones wrote:

> require slightly different flags to inform the core that we 'are'
> booting with DT.

Is there some situation when we would want to say we're booting from DT
when we aren't?  Just wondering about the quotes.

> +static const struct snd_dmaengine_pcm_config ux500_dmaengine_of_pcm_config = {
> +	.pcm_hardware = &ux500_pcm_hw,
> +	.prealloc_buffer_size = 128 * 1024,

You shouldn't need to set this explicitly, the generic code should be
able to pick a number for you - if you do need this number please
explain why the number was chosen in the comments (or fix the core to
guess better).  At the minute the core just makes up a number too but at
least then it's a consistent random number between platforms.

Can you also get away without the pcm_hardware - the core should also
have support for discovering this by querying the DMA controller?

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (837 bytes)