linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/5] ASoC: samsung: remove DMA filter function and data

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Fri, 20 Jan 2023 13:29:13 +0100
From:   "Arnd Bergmann" <arnd@...db.de>
To:     "Mark Brown" <broonie@...nel.org>
Cc:     "Arnd Bergmann" <arnd@...nel.org>,
        "Sylwester Nawrocki" <s.nawrocki@...sung.com>,
        "Krzysztof Kozlowski" <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>,
        "Alim Akhtar" <alim.akhtar@...sung.com>,
        "Liam Girdwood" <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
        "Jaroslav Kysela" <perex@...ex.cz>,
        "Takashi Iwai" <tiwai@...e.com>,
        "Charles Keepax" <ckeepax@...nsource.cirrus.com>,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        alsa-devel@...a-project.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] ASoC: samsung: remove DMA filter function and data

On Fri, Jan 20, 2023, at 13:07, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 20, 2023 at 10:05:59AM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>
>> I see, this patch still depends on the s3c24xx removal, which
>> is in soc/for-next and I used for testing. I see a similar
>> problem with the MMP platform in patch 2/5. The series here
>> is mostly older patches I did a while ago and rebased on top
>> of the boardfile removal, but it breaks when it gets applied
>> first.
>
>> Unless there is anything in here that you really want to apply
>> for 6.3, lets drop all five for now, and I'll resend it
>> after the dust has settled on the boardfile removal.
>
> I'd left the ux500 stuff running through my testing, no
> particular urgency just it saves rereviewing anything.  Assuming
> it's fine (seems so thus far) I'll push it out.

Yes, sounds good to me, I don't see any risk of missed
dependencies for that.

       Arnd