linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] ASoC: dapm: Revert "use component prefix when checking widget names"

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: <20210723152403.GH5221@sirena.org.uk>
Date:   Fri, 23 Jul 2021 16:24:03 +0100
From:   Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To:     Richard Fitzgerald <rf@...nsource.cirrus.com>
Cc:     Pierre-Louis Bossart <pierre-louis.bossart@...ux.intel.com>,
        rander.wang@...ux.intel.com, shumingf@...ltek.com,
        patches@...nsource.cirrus.com, alsa-devel@...a-project.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Lucas Tanure <tanureal@...nsource.cirrus.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ASoC: dapm: Revert "use component prefix when checking
 widget names"

On Fri, Jul 23, 2021 at 04:17:26PM +0100, Richard Fitzgerald wrote:
> On 22/07/2021 10:55, Richard Fitzgerald wrote:
> > On 05/07/2021 17:50, Mark Brown wrote:

> > I don't mind if someone wants to change the core dapm functions if that
> > is generally useful, providing that it also updates all callers of those
> > functions to still work.

> > Changing the behaviour of core code to fix the Realtek driver without
> > updating other callers of those functions is a problem.

> Just to point out this is breaking stuff right now. It's not just
> theoretical.

You took several weeks to respond to my review comment, I'm sure you can
cope with waiting a day or two for a response to your followup (which
I'm having trouble understanding TBH).  It would probably help if you
could specifically identify the problem you are seeing and where you're
seeing it - as I said in my review comment there appears to be a
misconception about how the APIs are expected to work.

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