From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from alsa0.perex.cz (alsa0.perex.cz [77.48.224.243]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4C9CEC433EF for ; Fri, 10 Dec 2021 11:32:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: from alsa1.perex.cz (alsa1.perex.cz [207.180.221.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by alsa0.perex.cz (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A44EE1FCA; Fri, 10 Dec 2021 12:31:49 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 alsa0.perex.cz A44EE1FCA DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=alsa-project.org; s=default; t=1639135959; bh=WC3yHWSmgEqvitDRxqDxx3dms+8Jbme1gjcws6lqa1c=; h=Date:Subject:To:References:From:In-Reply-To:Cc:List-Id: List-Unsubscribe:List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help:List-Subscribe: From; b=EaCtDmbDwxH8Hh2eYMyQL1Jk4MT7KmymdYQuovhn6ydyqm6TJEz59M7SIbU2P+orE vBF0AswPkviJT98dM/Bx5skHFxHUioI1+WDVpCA9MevRDmmpxn9iDI/0m2+SozopsK vPF4CvDX87eTMmQFZg44hrOtJJzoxbGhNGJES0DY= Received: from alsa1.perex.cz (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by alsa1.perex.cz (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3CF8BF804CC; Fri, 10 Dec 2021 12:31:49 +0100 (CET) Received: by alsa1.perex.cz (Postfix, from userid 50401) id 486D1F804EC; Fri, 10 Dec 2021 12:31:48 +0100 (CET) Received: from wp530.webpack.hosteurope.de (wp530.webpack.hosteurope.de [IPv6:2a01:488:42:1000:50ed:8234::]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by alsa1.perex.cz (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1F6EDF804CC for ; Fri, 10 Dec 2021 12:31:39 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 alsa1.perex.cz 1F6EDF804CC Received: from ip4d173d4a.dynamic.kabel-deutschland.de ([77.23.61.74] helo=[192.168.66.200]); authenticated by wp530.webpack.hosteurope.de running ExIM with esmtpsa (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) id 1mve7k-0007kh-OC; Fri, 10 Dec 2021 12:31:36 +0100 Message-ID: <977e3179-89a8-6abf-8a8f-7afe13c44dee@leemhuis.info> Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2021 12:31:34 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.3.0 Subject: Re: Is it a regression? 5.15.5: No sound with speaker-test. 5.12.13: it works. Content-Language: en-BZ To: u34@net9.ga, Takashi Iwai References: From: Thorsten Leemhuis In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-bounce-key: webpack.hosteurope.de; regressions@leemhuis.info; 1639135903; 8f5a8c9b; X-HE-SMSGID: 1mve7k-0007kh-OC Cc: alsa-devel@alsa-project.org, "regressions@lists.linux.dev" X-BeenThere: alsa-devel@alsa-project.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: "Alsa-devel mailing list for ALSA developers - http://www.alsa-project.org" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: alsa-devel-bounces@alsa-project.org Sender: "Alsa-devel" On 08.12.21 13:29, u34@net9.ga wrote: > Takashi Iwai wrote: >> On Mon, 29 Nov 2021 14:03:05 +0100, >> u34@net9.ga wrote: >>> >>> The following looks to me a regression in the linux sound driver. >>> alsa-info.sh output is included at the bottom of this message. There are 2 >>> outputs. An output with a 5.12.13 kernel. The other output is with a >>> 5.15.5. They were obtained with the same PC. With 5.12.13, the >>> speaker-test program works as expected. There is no sound when the >>> speaker-test program is ran with 5.15.5. >>> 5.15.5 has >>> options snd-hda-intel id=PCH index=0 >>> options snd-hda-intel id=HDMI index=1 >>> , which 5.12.13 does not have. >> >> Both those lines conflict with each other, so they make no sense and >> are already incorrect. >> >> If you want to swap the card indices inevitably needed, just pass a >> single option line below instead. >> >> options snd-hda-intel index=1,0 > > I have modified my setting as you suggested. > > speaker-test is now producing sound with both 5.12.13, and 5.15.5. Which is > actualy 5.15.6, not 5.15.5, by now. It got upgraded a few days ago. I don't > know what is the exact change that made it working. I have done several > other chnages in the last couple of days. > [...] Sounds to me like "there might still be a small problem lurking there, but things are working now for the reporter and maybe the problem was caused by something else anyway", so I guess I'll remove in from the regression tracking. #regzbot invalid: things are working again, what exactly helped remains unkown #regzbot ignore-activity Ciao, Thorsten (wearing his 'Linux kernel regression tracker' hat). P.S.: As a Linux kernel regression tracker I'm getting a lot of reports on my table. I can only look briefly into most of them. Unfortunately therefore I sometimes will get things wrong or miss something important. I hope that's not the case here; if you think it is, don't hesitate to tell me about it in a public reply. That's in everyone's interest, as what I wrote above might be misleading to everyone reading this; any suggestion I gave thus might sent someone reading this down the wrong rabbit hole, which none of us wants. BTW, I have no personal interest in this issue, which is tracked using regzbot, my Linux kernel regression tracking bot (https://linux-regtracking.leemhuis.info/regzbot/). I'm only posting this mail to get things rolling again and hence don't need to be CC on all further activities wrt to this regression.