linux-kernel - Re: [alsa-devel] [PATCH] ASoC: dpcm: don't do hw_param when BE has done hw

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: <20140111120826.GS29039@sirena.org.uk>
Date:	Sat, 11 Jan 2014 12:08:26 +0000
From:	Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To:	Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.de>
Cc:	Liam Girdwood <liam.r.girdwood@...ux.intel.com>,
	"alsa-devel@...a-project.org" <alsa-devel@...a-project.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Nenghua Cao <nhcao@...vell.com>
Subject: Re: [alsa-devel] [PATCH] ASoC: dpcm: don't do hw_param when BE has
 done	hw_param

On Sat, Jan 11, 2014 at 10:35:33AM +0100, Takashi Iwai wrote:

> But, the point is that basically we already know that something is
> wrong at the point BE2 setting up an incompatible hw_params; then it
> should be notified properly to FE1, or the incompatible change must be
> handled as an error.  This is the missing piece in the current
> implementation.  The skip of redundant BE hw_params call can be
> implemented as an optimization in this compatibility check, too.

Only in the case where they actually are incompatible though - if
there's DSP in place which can do suitable mixing it's not an issue.
At the minute the core is relying on the drivers handling any limits
just like with the CODECs.

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