linux-kernel - Re: [alsa-devel] [PATCH 00/11] Add AXD Audio Processing IP driver

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: <5450C607.9060603@imgtec.com>
Date:	Wed, 29 Oct 2014 10:48:39 +0000
From:	Qais Yousef <qais.yousef@...tec.com>
To:	Vinod Koul <vinod.koul@...el.com>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
CC:	<devicetree@...r.kernel.org>, Neil Jones <neil.jones@...tec.com>,
	"Arnd Bergmann" <arnd@...db.de>,
	Clemens Ladisch <clemens@...isch.de>,
	<alsa-devel@...a-project.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [alsa-devel] [PATCH 00/11] Add AXD Audio Processing IP driver

On 10/29/2014 05:24 AM, Vinod Koul wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 10:50:19AM +0800, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
>> cepted into staging until this is resolved?
>> If you are willing to abide by the staging rules:
>> 	- incremental patches only doing one thing at a time
>> 	- never break the build
>> 	- constantly moving forward to getting merged (i.e. no new
>> 	  features being added)
>>
>> I think it will be easier for you to do the work outside of the tree as
>> you are going to be changing the API, which is not going to be easy to
>> do in an incremental patch series.
>>
>> And yes, this isn't going to be a trivial amount of work, sorry.
> I am not sure if it can fit into staging model. The whole design of driver
> would need rework and all the infrastructure added here for exposing stuff
> to usermode will be thrown away, so this driver would simply need an
> major overhaul.
>
> If this was ALSA driver and we would need to plumb it for acceptance then
> would have made sense in include, but thats not the fact today
>
> Thanks

Thanks for all the comments Vinod. Looks like I made a bad judgement, 
clearly I wouldn't want to rewrite the code twice :) I'll take a closer 
look at using the framework and maybe start with the features that we 
know will work and build up the rest incrementally and address problems 
from there.

Thanks,
Qais
--
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/