linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v7 5/7] ASoC: fsl_asrc: Move common definition to fsl_asrc

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]

Date:   Tue, 14 Apr 2020 10:21:29 +0800
From:   Shengjiu Wang <shengjiu.wang@...il.com>
To:     Nicolin Chen <nicoleotsuka@...il.com>
Cc:     Shengjiu Wang <shengjiu.wang@....com>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        "open list:OPEN FIRMWARE AND FLATTENED DEVICE TREE BINDINGS" 
        <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux-ALSA <alsa-devel@...a-project.org>,
        Timur Tabi <timur@...nel.org>, Xiubo Li <Xiubo.Lee@...il.com>,
        linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.com>,
        Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
        Fabio Estevam <festevam@...il.com>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 5/7] ASoC: fsl_asrc: Move common definition to fsl_asrc_common

On Tue, Apr 14, 2020 at 10:09 AM Nicolin Chen <nicoleotsuka@...il.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Apr 14, 2020 at 08:43:07AM +0800, Shengjiu Wang wrote:
> > There is a new ASRC included in i.MX serial platform, there
> > are some common definition can be shared with each other.
> > So move the common definition to a separate header file.
> >
> > And add fsl_asrc_pair_priv and fsl_asrc_priv for
> > the variable specific for the module, which can be used
> > internally.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Shengjiu Wang <shengjiu.wang@....com>
>
> > diff --git a/sound/soc/fsl/fsl_asrc.c b/sound/soc/fsl/fsl_asrc.c
> > +static size_t fsl_asrc_get_pair_priv_size(void)
> > +{
> > +     return sizeof(struct fsl_asrc_pair_priv);
> > +}
>
> Perhaps we haven't understood completely each other's point.
>
> Yet, would the following change work?

Should work, almost same, or do you want me to use variable to
replace function pointer?

best regards
wang shengjiu