linux-kernel - Re: [GIT PULL] sound fixes for 5.8-rc1

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:   Fri, 12 Jun 2020 15:46:46 +0100
From:   Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To:     Pierre-Louis Bossart <pierre-louis.bossart@...ux.intel.com>
Cc:     John Stultz <john.stultz@...aro.org>, Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.de>,
        Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Bard Liao <yung-chuan.liao@...ux.intel.com>,
        Guennadi Liakhovetski <guennadi.liakhovetski@...ux.intel.com>,
        Srini Kandagatla <srinivas.kandagatla@...aro.org>,
        Vinod Koul <vinod.koul@...aro.org>,
        Amit Pundir <amit.pundir@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] sound fixes for 5.8-rc1

On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 08:54:11AM -0500, Pierre-Louis Bossart wrote:

> I think that those configuration errors are the problem and should be fixed
> as a prerequisite to the removal of the duplication between
> dpcm_playback/dpcm_capture/playback_only/capture_only. it may be painful and
> generate noise for a while, but if we only throw a warning what are the odds
> all those configuration errors will eventually be fixed?

Yeah, I'm kind of pessimistic about the likelyhood of people paying
attention to warnings.

> If we need more time for validation on all platforms, then maybe we can
> first relax the check for 5.8-rc1 as suggested by John, but re-add the
> -EINVAL on -next to give a target of 5.9 with all configurations fixed?

I can't help feeling that it'd be postponing the inevitable, but perhaps
I'm being overly pessimistic here.  The change did obviously go in quite
late though so it's not the worst idea if you want to send the patch?

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (489 bytes)