[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140207164036.GC5499@hercules>
Date: Fri, 7 Feb 2014 16:40:36 +0000
From: Luis Henriques <luis.henriques@...onical.com>
To: Stephen Warren <swarren@...dotorg.org>
Cc: Levente Kurusa <levex@...ux.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
stable@...r.kernel.org, kernel-team@...ts.ubuntu.com,
Anssi Hannula <anssi.hannula@....fi>,
Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.de>,
Stephen Warren <swarren@...dia.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3.11 229/233] ALSA: hda - hdmi: introduce patch_nvhdmi()
On Fri, Feb 07, 2014 at 09:20:57AM -0700, Stephen Warren wrote:
> On 02/07/2014 07:36 AM, Luis Henriques wrote:
> > On Fri, Feb 07, 2014 at 12:58:47PM +0100, Levente Kurusa wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> On 02/07/2014 12:47 PM, Luis Henriques wrote:
> >>> 3.11.10.4 -stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know.
> >>> [...]
> >>>
> >>> +static int patch_nvhdmi(struct hda_codec *codec)
> >>> +{
> >>> + struct hdmi_spec *spec;
> >>> + int err;
> >>> +
> >>> + err = patch_generic_hdmi(codec);
> >>> + if (err)
> >>> + return err;
> >>> +
> >>> + spec = codec->spec;
> >>> +
> >>> + return 0;
> >>> +}
> >>> [...]
> >>
> >> Is it just me or is it that the 'spec' variable has no use?
> >
> > This does seem a little bit odd indeed. I've picked the backport provided
> > by Stephen, which has been queued for the 3.10 and 3.12 stable kernels as
> > well. The original patch actually modifies the ops field in the hdmi_spec
> > struct, however this field doesn't exist in this kernel version.
> >
> > Stephen, could you please comment? Since this is just a partial backport
> > of 611885bc963a ("ALSA: hda - hdmi: Disallow unsupported 2ch remapping on
> > NVIDIA codecs"), I'm assuming this is correct -- although the spec
> > variable could have been dropped.
>
> The very next patch of mine to this file (in other stable releases)
> makes use of the spec variable. I kept the addition of the spec variable
> in this patch, even though it isn't used until the next patch, so that
> it stayed as part of the backport of this patch which originally added
> it, rather than moving it to the other patch I backported, and hence
> mixing up multiple upstream patches in the same backported patch.
Doh! I've applied both of your two patches to the 3.11 kernel. And while
I first reviewed them, I've seen that detail and it made perfect sense ;)
Anyway, thank you for your clarification.
Cheers,
--
Luis
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists