linux-kernel - Re: [alsa-devel] [PATCH v1 3/3] ASoC: soc-core: fix platform name vs. of

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: <ea6b6a3a-b4eb-1d29-51fd-330b2b170005@nvidia.com>
Date:   Fri, 11 Jan 2019 09:15:42 +0000
From:   Jon Hunter <jonathanh@...dia.com>
To:     Kuninori Morimoto <kuninori.morimoto.gx@...esas.com>
CC:     Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
        Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
        <linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org>, Matthias Reichl <hias@...us.com>,
        <alsa-devel@...a-project.org>,
        Marcel Ziswiler <marcel.ziswiler@...adex.com>,
        Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.com>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Marcel Ziswiler <marcel@...wiler.com>
Subject: Re: [alsa-devel] [PATCH v1 3/3] ASoC: soc-core: fix platform name vs.
 of_node assignement


On 11/01/2019 08:51, Kuninori Morimoto wrote:
>>> Indeed there is such case so far, but my understanding is that current
>>> driver should select "legacy style" or "modern style".
>>> If driver setup it as "legacy", but access to "modern" member,
>>> it is driver side bug, right ?
>>
>> Yes absolutely it is a driver bug, but looking at the snd_soc_dai_link
>> structure today it is not clear what the driver should be setting and
>> what is 'modern' and what is 'legacy'. You need to dig through the git
>> history and code to figure this out. So you could say it is not very
>> well documented/commented from a soc-core perspective and could be easy
>> for a driver writer to get themselves in a pickle/mess. Anyway, that is
>> easy to fix and we could add some comments to clear it up.
> 
> Thank you for your feedback.
> Yes, indeed there is no enough information/documentation about
> legacy/modern style, and its plan
> (= all driver will be switched to modern, legacy will be removed, etc, etc..).
> 
> So, can you agree about these ?
> 1) Add enough information/documentation about legacy/modern style and its plan.
> 2) Add dirty pointer fixup patch as workaround
> 3) switch to modern style as much as possible

I think that Mark needs to decided on whether use your 'dirty pointer'
fix or not.

Jon

-- 
nvpublic