linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] ASoC: fsl_sai: fix 1:1 bclk:mclk ratio support

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Thu, 07 Apr 2022 10:38:24 +0100
From:   Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To:     viorel.suman@....com, shengjiu.wang@...il.com,
        nicoleotsuka@...il.com, lgirdwood@...il.com,
        Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@...gutronix.de>, a.fatoum@...gutronix.de,
        Xiubo.Lee@...il.com, festevam@...il.com
Cc:     kernel@...gutronix.de, Jaroslav Kysela <perex@...ex.cz>,
        alsa-devel@...a-project.org, Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ASoC: fsl_sai: fix 1:1 bclk:mclk ratio support

On Tue, 5 Apr 2022 17:57:31 +0200, Ahmad Fatoum wrote:
> Refactoring in commit a50b7926d015 ("ASoC: fsl_sai: implement 1:1
> bclk:mclk ratio support") led to the bypass never happening
> as (ratio = 1) was caught in the existing if (ratio & 1) continue;
> check. The correct check sequence instead is:
> 
>  - skip all ratios lower than one and higher than 512
>  - skip all odd ratios except for 1:1
>  - skip 1:1 ratio if and only if !support_1_1_ratio
> 
> [...]

Applied to

   https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/broonie/sound.git for-next

Thanks!

[1/1] ASoC: fsl_sai: fix 1:1 bclk:mclk ratio support
      commit: d00887c106dac47b9af6ed70e8d5c45b69c4bd52

All being well this means that it will be integrated into the linux-next
tree (usually sometime in the next 24 hours) and sent to Linus during
the next merge window (or sooner if it is a bug fix), however if
problems are discovered then the patch may be dropped or reverted.

You may get further e-mails resulting from automated or manual testing
and review of the tree, please engage with people reporting problems and
send followup patches addressing any issues that are reported if needed.

If any updates are required or you are submitting further changes they
should be sent as incremental updates against current git, existing
patches will not be replaced.

Please add any relevant lists and maintainers to the CCs when replying
to this mail.

Thanks,
Mark