[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <27b9fe7a-18cc-61ee-1e4d-72282d8eaa82@linux.intel.com>
Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2021 14:24:19 -0500
From: Pierre-Louis Bossart <pierre-louis.bossart@...ux.intel.com>
To: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>, alsa-devel@...a-project.org
Cc: Mark@...ena.org.uk, Brown@...ena.org.uk,
Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.com>,
open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
liam.r.girdwood@...ux.intel.com, Jaroslav Kysela <perex@...ex.cz>,
vkoul@...nel.org,
Kuninori Morimoto <kuninori.morimoto.gx@...esas.com>,
tiwai@...e.de
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/2] ASoC: soc-pcm: protect BE dailink state changes
in trigger
On 8/26/21 1:30 PM, Mark Brown wrote:
> From: Mark Brown,,, <broonie@...nel.org>
>
> On Tue, 17 Aug 2021 11:40:53 -0500, Pierre-Louis Bossart wrote:
>> When more than one FE is connected to a BE, e.g. in a mixing use case,
>> the BE can be triggered multiple times when the FE are opened/started
>> concurrently. This race condition is problematic in the case of
>> SoundWire BE dailinks, and this is not desirable in a general
>> case. The code carefully checks when the BE can be stopped or
>> hw_free'ed, but the trigger code does not use any mutual exclusion.
>>
>> [...]
>
> Applied, thanks!
>
> [1/2] ASoC: soc-pcm: protect BE dailink state changes in trigger
> commit: 0c75fc7193387776c10f7c7b440d93496e3d5e21
> [2/2] ASoC: soc-pcm: test refcount before triggering
> commit: 6479f7588651cbc9c91e61c20ff39119cbc8feba
Ah sorry, there were still some issues in this RFC, we did more testing
and came up with a lot of improvements. The intent of the RFC status was
also to make sure it wasn't applied before the merge window.
Can this be reverted in your branch Mark?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists