linux-kernel - Re: Fwd: Steam Deck OLED 6.8.2 nau8821-max fails

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: Sun, 7 Apr 2024 09:47:00 +0200
From: "Linux regression tracking (Thorsten Leemhuis)"
 <regressions@...mhuis.info>
To: Bagas Sanjaya <bagasdotme@...il.com>,
 Venkata Prasad Potturu <venkataprasad.potturu@....com>
Cc: Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>, Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
 Jaroslav Kysela <perex@...ex.cz>, Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.com>,
 Cristian Ciocaltea <cristian.ciocaltea@...labora.com>,
 Emil Velikov <emil.velikov@...labora.com>,
 Kuninori Morimoto <kuninori.morimoto.gx@...esas.com>,
 Arun Gopal Kondaveeti <arungopal.kondaveeti@....com>,
 Pierre-Louis Bossart <pierre-louis.bossart@...ux.intel.com>,
 Daniel <dmanlfc@...il.com>,
 Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
 Linux Regressions <regressions@...ts.linux.dev>,
 Linux Sound System <linux-sound@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Fwd: Steam Deck OLED 6.8.2 nau8821-max fails

On 06.04.24 15:08, Bagas Sanjaya wrote:
> 
> On Bugzilla, Daniel <dmanlfc@...il.com> reported topology regression
> on Steam Deck OLED [1]. He wrote:

Bagas, why didn't you forward this to me in private first, as we agreed
on as general procedure for cases like this?

Anyway:

>> I'm adding this here, I hope it's the correct place.
>>
>> Currently the Steam Deck OLED fails with Kernel 6.8.2 when trying to initialise the topology for the device.
>> I'm using the `sof-vangogh-nau8821-max.tplg` file from the Steam Deck OLED and associated firmware.
> 
> See Bugzilla for the full thread.
> 
> [1]: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=218677

A quick search made me find these posts/threads that foreshadow the problem:

https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20231219030728.2431640-1-cristian.ciocaltea@collabora.com/
https://lore.kernel.org/all/a3357e1f-f354-4d4b-9751-6b2182dceea6@amd.com/

>From a quick look at the second discussion it seems a bit like we are
screwed, as iiutc topology files are out in the wild for one or the
other approach. So we might have to bite a bullet there and accept the
regression -- but I might easily be totally mistaken here. Would be good
in one of the experts (Venkata Prasad Potturu maybe?) could quickly
explain what's up here.

Ciao, Thorsten