linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 0/6] Enable Greybus Audio codec driver

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: <20200612153722.GB26807@gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 12 Jun 2020 21:07:24 +0530
From:   Vaibhav Agarwal <vaibhav.sr@...il.com>
To:     Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
Cc:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Alex Elder <elder@...nel.org>, Johan Hovold <johan@...nel.org>,
        Mark Greer <mgreer@...malcreek.com>,
        Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.com>,
        Jaroslav Kysela <perex@...ex.cz>,
        Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
        greybus-dev@...ts.linaro.org, devel@...verdev.osuosl.org,
        alsa-devel@...a-project.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@...tlin.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/6] Enable Greybus Audio codec driver

On Thu, Jun 11, 2020 at 09:26:16AM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 10, 2020 at 11:53:24PM +0530, Vaibhav Agarwal wrote:
> 
> > With patch#6 in this series, I'm proposing some of the (dummy) helper 
> > APIs required to link DAPM DAI widgets for the GB Audio modules 
> > added/removed dynamically.
> 
> > Eventually, I would like to propose relevant changes in snd-soc APIs to 
> > enable dynamic linking of DAI widgets for the modules added and 
> > remove/free component controls for the module removed.
> 
> > I'm seeking your opinion on the proposed changes. And as per the 
> > recommendation I'm sharing the changes with ASoC mailing list as well.
> 
> These are proposed incremental changes to an out of tree driver that has
> never been submitted.  I don't know what the current code looks like,
> what it's supposed to be doing or anything like that so I've no idea
> what's going on or why.
> 
> > Kindly suggest me the preferred way to follow on this thread. 
> 
> This is effectively out of tree code, until someone submits it properly
> I'm not sure it's useful to submit incremental patches upstream.

Thanks for the suggestion Mark. I'll create a separate patchset aligned 
to the ASoC tree in next ~2 weeks and share them separately.

Hi Greg,

Do you think the current patchset can be considered for the purpose of 
resolving componentization issue raised by Alexandre?

--
Regards,
Vaibhav