linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 07/40] soundwire: intel: fix channel number reported by hardware

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: <20190802115719.GJ12733@vkoul-mobl.Dlink>
Date:   Fri, 2 Aug 2019 17:27:19 +0530
From:   Vinod Koul <vkoul@...nel.org>
To:     Pierre-Louis Bossart <pierre-louis.bossart@...ux.intel.com>
Cc:     alsa-devel@...a-project.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        tiwai@...e.de, broonie@...nel.org, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org,
        jank@...ence.com, srinivas.kandagatla@...aro.org,
        slawomir.blauciak@...el.com, Sanyog Kale <sanyog.r.kale@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 07/40] soundwire: intel: fix channel number reported
 by hardware

On 25-07-19, 18:39, Pierre-Louis Bossart wrote:
> PDI2 reports an invalid count, force the correct hardware-supported
> value
> 
> Signed-off-by: Pierre-Louis Bossart <pierre-louis.bossart@...ux.intel.com>
> ---
>  drivers/soundwire/intel.c | 9 +++++++++
>  1 file changed, 9 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/soundwire/intel.c b/drivers/soundwire/intel.c
> index 497879dd9c0d..51990b192dc0 100644
> --- a/drivers/soundwire/intel.c
> +++ b/drivers/soundwire/intel.c
> @@ -401,6 +401,15 @@ intel_pdi_get_ch_cap(struct sdw_intel *sdw, unsigned int pdi_num, bool pcm)
>  
>  	if (pcm) {
>  		count = intel_readw(shim, SDW_SHIM_PCMSYCHC(link_id, pdi_num));
> +
> +		/*
> +		 * TODO: pdi number 2 reports channel count as 1 even though
> +		 * it supports 8 channel. Performing hardcoding for pdi
> +		 * number 2.
> +		 */
> +		if (pdi_num == 2)
> +			count = 7;

Is that true for all Intel controllers or some generations. Would it not
be better to put this under some flag which is set on platform basis?

> +
>  	} else {
>  		count = intel_readw(shim, SDW_SHIM_PDMSCAP(link_id));
>  		count = ((count & SDW_SHIM_PDMSCAP_CPSS) >>
> -- 
> 2.20.1

-- 
~Vinod