linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 03/14] ASoC: qcom: Add USB backend ASoC driver for Q6

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]

Date:   Tue, 27 Dec 2022 15:11:27 +0000
From:   Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To:     Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc:     Wesley Cheng <quic_wcheng@...cinc.com>,
        srinivas.kandagatla@...aro.org, mathias.nyman@...el.com,
        perex@...ex.cz, lgirdwood@...il.com, andersson@...nel.org,
        krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org, Thinh.Nguyen@...opsys.com,
        bgoswami@...cinc.com, tiwai@...e.com, robh+dt@...nel.org,
        agross@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, alsa-devel@...a-project.org,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-usb@...r.kernel.org,
        quic_jackp@...cinc.com, quic_plai@...cinc.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 03/14] ASoC: qcom: Add USB backend ASoC driver for Q6

On Tue, Dec 27, 2022 at 02:45:13PM +0100, Greg KH wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 27, 2022 at 01:04:55PM +0000, Mark Brown wrote:
> > On Sat, Dec 24, 2022 at 10:02:59AM +0100, Greg KH wrote:

> > > > + * Copyright (c) 2022 Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. All rights reserved.

> > > All of the code in this patch series is older than 2022 as I know it has
> > > been in shipping devices for many years.  Please use the proper
> > > copyright year to make your lawyers happy...

> > Are you *positive* about this.  Based on some preparatory discussions
> > the Qualcomm people had with Takashi and I it seemed like this was a new
> > version of existing concepts.  I'm sure they had something already but
> > it's not obvious to me that they're just posting the same code.

> I thought that this same code has been shipping in devices for a few
> years now in the last few Samsung phone models.  Is this not the same
> code that is in those devices?

> If not, why not, what happened to that codebase that makes it not worthy
> of being submitted upstream?

I don't specifically know anything about that code but I'd expect that
for out of tree code breaking new ground like this there'd be a strong
likelyhood that there'd be design level issues and that's what the pre
submission discussions were all about - how to fit the concept into the
kernel subsystems in a way that might be maintainable.  There's also
been the whole transition to their new DSP firmware going on.  It's
possible that what was shipped was implemented in the same way with the
same code but I'd not assume that this is the case without actually
comparing the two.

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