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  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 09:56:09 -0500
From:   Pierre-Louis Bossart <pierre-louis.bossart@...ux.intel.com>
To:     Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
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 6/12/20 9:46 AM, Mark Brown wrote:
> 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?

I see patches from Srinivas to fix the issue reported by John, so maybe 
apply those patches first and if we see another issue on another 
platform we relax the check?

Powered by blists - more mailing lists