linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] soundwire: stream: fix programming slave ports for non-continous port maps

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]

Message-ID: <acec443c-f9ab-4c1d-b1ab-b8620dfef77f@linaro.org>
Date: Wed, 4 Sep 2024 13:43:50 +0200
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
To: "Liao, Bard" <bard.liao@...el.com>,
 "Liao, Bard" <yung-chuan.liao@...ux.intel.com>, Vinod Koul
 <vkoul@...nel.org>,
 Pierre-Louis Bossart <pierre-louis.bossart@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: "Kale, Sanyog R" <sanyog.r.kale@...el.com>,
 Shreyas NC <shreyas.nc@...el.com>,
 "alsa-devel@...a-project.org" <alsa-devel@...a-project.org>,
 "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
 "stable@...r.kernel.org" <stable@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] soundwire: stream: fix programming slave ports for
 non-continous port maps

On 03/09/2024 17:17, Liao, Bard wrote:

>>>
>>> then dpn_prop[0].num = 1 and dpn_prop[1].num = 3. And we need to go
>>>
>>> throuth dpn_prop[0] and dpn_prop[1] instead of dpn_prop[1] and
>> dpn_prop[3].
>>>
>>
>> What are the source or sink ports in your case? Maybe you just generate
>> wrong mask?
> 
> I checked my mask is 0xa when I do aplay and it matches the sink_ports of
> the rt722 codec.
> 
>>
>> It's not only my patch which uses for_each_set_bit(). sysfs_slave_dpn
>> does the same.
> 
> What sysfs_slave_dpn does is 
>         i = 0;                          
>         for_each_set_bit(bit, &mask, 32) {
>                 if (bit == N) {
>                         return sprintf(buf, format_string,
>                                        dpn[i].field);
>                 }
>                 i++;
>         }                         
> It uses a variable "i" to represent the array index of dpn[i].
> But, it is for_each_set_bit(i, &mask, 32) in your patch and the variable "i"
> which represents each bit of the mask is used as the index of dpn_prop[i].
> 
> Again, the point is that the bits of mask is not the index of the dpn_prop[]
> array.

Yes, you are right. I think I cannot achieve my initial goal of using
same dpn array with different indices. My patch should be reverted, I
believe.

I'll send a revert, sorry for the mess.

Best regards,
Krzysztof