linux-kernel - Re: [Xen-devel] [RFC v1] ALSA: xen-front: Add Xen para-virtualized frontend 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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <546442fa-38b7-6577-56f7-273be9799c1b@epam.com>
Date:   Fri, 22 Dec 2017 18:07:15 +0200
From:   Oleksandr Andrushchenko <Oleksandr_Andrushchenko@...m.com>
To:     Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>
Cc:     Oleksandr Andrushchenko <andr2000@...il.com>, tiwai@...e.com,
        alsa-devel@...a-project.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        xen-devel <xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org>,
        Clemens Ladisch <clemens@...isch.de>,
        Takashi Sakamoto <o-takashi@...amocchi.jp>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [RFC v1] ALSA: xen-front: Add Xen para-virtualized
 frontend driver



On 12/22/2017 05:58 PM, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 22, 2017 at 05:48:45PM +0200, Oleksandr Andrushchenko wrote:
>> On 12/22/2017 05:12 PM, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
>>> On Mon, Dec 11, 2017 at 10:45:27AM +0200, Oleksandr Andrushchenko wrote:
>>>> ping
>>> ..snip..
>>>>>> This is implemented as a change to the sndif protocol [8] and allows
>>>>>> [8] https://github.com/andr2000/linux/commit/095d7feae00bf00c852c67c4f1044de5601678ed
>>> .. I must have missed it being posted.
>>>
>>> But it looks OK to me - could you repost it and please have me on To: list?
>>>
>> Did I get you right that you want me to repost the RFC again?
> Yes pls, but pls skip the RFC part of the patch. Just as v1 please.
Ah, well, I am not quite sure this is the right time to discuss the changes
in terms of patches: I would like to discuss the idea first, e.g.
if the approach itself is acceptable by the ALSA community and if it is,
then I'll push v1, e.g move to patches stage. Hence, here is the RFC...

The driver itself (at the moment) is just a proof-of-concept for the
community to show that the approach we are offering in the RFC actually 
works.

Does the above make sense?

Thank you,
Oleksandr