linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 0/4] Support mute notifications for CS35L41 HDA

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, 21 Sep 2023 16:28:16 +0200
From:   Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.de>
To:     Stefan Binding <sbinding@...nsource.cirrus.com>
Cc:     Jaroslav Kysela <perex@...ex.cz>, Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.com>,
        <alsa-devel@...a-project.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        <patches@...nsource.cirrus.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 0/4] Support mute notifications for CS35L41 HDA

On Wed, 20 Sep 2023 17:54:46 +0200,
Stefan Binding wrote:
> 
> Some systems use a special keyboard shortcut to mute speaker audio.
> On systems using CS35L41 HDA which have this shortcut, add a
> mechanism which uses ACPI notifications to determine when the
> shortcut is pressed, and then mute the amps inside the driver.
> 
> Since this is not a normal mute mechanism, it does not go through
> userspace. To allow userspace to be able to track this special
> state, add an ALSA control which tracks the state of this forced
> mute
> 
> Changes since v2:
> - Fixed compile issue when CONFIG_ACPI is missing
> 
> Changes since v3:
> - Split first patch into 3 separate patches
> - Ensure all acpi code is protected by check for CONFIG_ACPI in
> realtek driver
> 
> Stefan Binding (4):
>   ALSA: hda: cs35l41: Add notification support into component binding
>   ALSA: hda/realtek: Support ACPI Notification framework via component
>     binding
>   ALSA: hda: cs35l41: Support mute notifications for CS35L41 HDA
>   ALSA: hda: cs35l41: Add read-only ALSA control for forced mute

The patch 3 doesn't seem applicable cleanly.
Could you rebase the patches on the top of my for-next branch?


thanks,

Takashi