linux-kernel - Re: [alsa-devel] [RFC PATCH 38/40] soundwire: cadence_master: make clock stop exit configurable on init

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Fri, 26 Jul 2019 12:35:47 -0500
From:   Pierre-Louis Bossart <pierre-louis.bossart@...ux.intel.com>
To:     Guennadi Liakhovetski <guennadi.liakhovetski@...ux.intel.com>
Cc:     alsa-devel@...a-project.org, tiwai@...e.de,
        gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        vkoul@...nel.org, broonie@...nel.org,
        srinivas.kandagatla@...aro.org, jank@...ence.com,
        slawomir.blauciak@...el.com, Sanyog Kale <sanyog.r.kale@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [alsa-devel] [RFC PATCH 38/40] soundwire: cadence_master: make
 clock stop exit configurable on init


>> -int sdw_cdns_init(struct sdw_cdns *cdns);
>> +int sdw_cdns_init(struct sdw_cdns *cdns, bool clock_stop_exit);
>>   int sdw_cdns_pdi_init(struct sdw_cdns *cdns,
>>   		      struct sdw_cdns_stream_config config);
>>   int sdw_cdns_exit_reset(struct sdw_cdns *cdns);
>> diff --git a/drivers/soundwire/intel.c b/drivers/soundwire/intel.c
>> index 1192d5775484..db7bf2912767 100644
>> --- a/drivers/soundwire/intel.c
>> +++ b/drivers/soundwire/intel.c
>> @@ -1043,7 +1043,7 @@ static int intel_init(struct sdw_intel *sdw)
>>   	intel_link_power_up(sdw);
>>   	intel_shim_init(sdw);
>>   
>> -	return sdw_cdns_init(&sdw->cdns);
>> +	return sdw_cdns_init(&sdw->cdns, false);
> 
> This is the only caller of this function so far, so, it looks like
> the second argument ATM is always "false." I assume you foresee other
> uses with "true" in the future, otherwise maybe just fix it to false
> in the function?

Since we are at RFC level things are not set in stone, it's not fully 
clear if this test is required or not. I added it since Rander reported 
an error on one of the target platforms that I didn't see personally. 
We'll double-check if it's needed. And if indeed it's needed, yes it'll 
be set to true when we add clock stop.