* revert: ASoC: Fail card instantiation if DAI format setup fails
@ 2019-09-06 15:00 Ricard Wanderlof
2019-09-06 18:29 ` Sasha Levin
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Ricard Wanderlof @ 2019-09-06 15:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Greg Kroah-Hartman, Mark Brown; +Cc: Sasha Levin, linux-kernel, stable
Sorry for the repost, I relized I stupidly got Greg's email adress wrong
first time around.
> > On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 12:00:14PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> > > On Sun, Aug 25, 2019 at 09:35:15PM -0400, Sasha Levin wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Aug 14, 2019 at 10:22:13AM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> > >
> > > > > > If the DAI format setup fails, there is no valid communication format
> > > > > > between CPU and CODEC, so fail card instantiation, rather than
> > > > continue
> > > > > > with a card that will most likely not function properly.
> > >
> > > > > This is another one where if nobody noticed a problem already and things
> > > > > just happened to be working this might break things, it's vanishingly
> > > > > unlikely to fix anything that was broken.
> > >
> > > > Same as the other patch: this patch suggests it fixes a real bug, and if
> > > > this patch is broken let's fix it.
> > >
> > > If anyone ran into this on the older kernel and fixed or worked
> > > around it locally there's a reasonable chance this will then
> > > break what they're doing. The patch itself is perfectly fine but
(Sorry about the mangled subject line, I'd accidentally deleted the
original message from my inbox.)
I'm a bit bewildered here. As the author of the original patch I'm of
course biased, and I can certainly understand the patch being dropped from
existing release branches, since as Mark correctly states, it does not fix
any broken behavior and might even break things that happen to work by
chance.
But is this being dropped from the master branch as well? To me it makes
the kernel behave in an inconsistent way, first reporting a failure to
instantiate a specific sound card in the kernel log, but then seemingly
bringing it up anyway.
/Ricard
--
Ricard Wolf Wanderlof ricardw(at)axis.com
Axis Communications AB, Lund, Sweden www.axis.com
Phone +46 46 272 2016 Fax +46 46 13 61 30
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: revert: ASoC: Fail card instantiation if DAI format setup fails
2019-09-06 15:00 revert: ASoC: Fail card instantiation if DAI format setup fails Ricard Wanderlof
@ 2019-09-06 18:29 ` Sasha Levin
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Sasha Levin @ 2019-09-06 18:29 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Ricard Wanderlof; +Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman, Mark Brown, linux-kernel, stable
On Fri, Sep 06, 2019 at 05:00:28PM +0200, Ricard Wanderlof wrote:
>
>Sorry for the repost, I relized I stupidly got Greg's email adress wrong
>first time around.
>
>> > On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 12:00:14PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
>> > > On Sun, Aug 25, 2019 at 09:35:15PM -0400, Sasha Levin wrote:
>> > > > On Wed, Aug 14, 2019 at 10:22:13AM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
>> > >
>> > > > > > If the DAI format setup fails, there is no valid communication format
>> > > > > > between CPU and CODEC, so fail card instantiation, rather than
>> > > > continue
>> > > > > > with a card that will most likely not function properly.
>> > >
>> > > > > This is another one where if nobody noticed a problem already and things
>> > > > > just happened to be working this might break things, it's vanishingly
>> > > > > unlikely to fix anything that was broken.
>> > >
>> > > > Same as the other patch: this patch suggests it fixes a real bug, and if
>> > > > this patch is broken let's fix it.
>> > >
>> > > If anyone ran into this on the older kernel and fixed or worked
>> > > around it locally there's a reasonable chance this will then
>> > > break what they're doing. The patch itself is perfectly fine but
>
>(Sorry about the mangled subject line, I'd accidentally deleted the
>original message from my inbox.)
>
>I'm a bit bewildered here. As the author of the original patch I'm of
>course biased, and I can certainly understand the patch being dropped from
>existing release branches, since as Mark correctly states, it does not fix
>any broken behavior and might even break things that happen to work by
>chance.
>
>But is this being dropped from the master branch as well? To me it makes
>the kernel behave in an inconsistent way, first reporting a failure to
>instantiate a specific sound card in the kernel log, but then seemingly
>bringing it up anyway.
Hi Richard,
This patch is only dropped from the stable branches, it still remains in
the mainline branch.
--
Thanks,
Sasha
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: revert: ASoC: Fail card instantiation if DAI format setup fails
2019-09-06 18:38 ` Sasha Levin
@ 2019-09-09 9:35 ` Mark Brown
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Mark Brown @ 2019-09-09 9:35 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Sasha Levin; +Cc: Ricard Wanderlof, stable, Greg Kroah-Hartman, linux-kernel
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 837 bytes --]
On Fri, Sep 06, 2019 at 02:38:24PM -0400, Sasha Levin wrote:
> However, I'd like to say that I don't agree with it. I understand your
> reasoning about keeping the stable trees conservative, but I feel that
> going to the extreme with it will just encourage folks to not upgrade
> between major versions.
This is a case where the change can't possibly make anything work
in itself, it can only break things and help with debugging. If
people are sitting on stable hopefully they're not still
debugging their systems. I don't understand why you are pushing
so hard for this, there is very little upside on stable.
> I'd like to think that upgrading major versions should be the same as
> upgrading minor ones (because numbers don't matter here). If that's not
> the case, let's fix it!
Backporting this won't help achieve that aim.
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: revert: ASoC: Fail card instantiation if DAI format setup fails
2019-09-06 10:58 ` Mark Brown
@ 2019-09-06 18:38 ` Sasha Levin
2019-09-09 9:35 ` Mark Brown
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Sasha Levin @ 2019-09-06 18:38 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Mark Brown; +Cc: Ricard Wanderlof, stable, Greg Kroah-Hartman, linux-kernel
On Fri, Sep 06, 2019 at 11:58:24AM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
>On Fri, Sep 06, 2019 at 10:40:01AM +0200, Ricard Wanderlof wrote:
>
>> But is this being dropped from the master branch as well? To me it makes
>> the kernel behave in an inconsistent way, first reporting a failure to
>> instantiate a specific sound card in the kernel log, but then seemingly
>> bringing it up anyway.
>
>No, this is absolutely a good and positive change to have in
>master and I'm not suggesting that we should drop it there -
>sorry if I sounded like that. I just want to be conservative for
>stable so that we don't have anyone updating their stable kernel
>and having their audio blow up on them, we don't want to do
>anything that'd discourage people from taking stable updates and
>hence missing out on security or critical stability updates.
Hi Mark,
I'm sorry for not dropping this to begin with: I saw your nack and the
patch ended up still being released because of my fuck up rather than
me purposefuly ignoring your ack, sorry.
However, I'd like to say that I don't agree with it. I understand your
reasoning about keeping the stable trees conservative, but I feel that
going to the extreme with it will just encourage folks to not upgrade
between major versions.
I'd like to think that upgrading major versions should be the same as
upgrading minor ones (because numbers don't matter here). If that's not
the case, let's fix it!
--
Thanks,
Sasha
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: revert: ASoC: Fail card instantiation if DAI format setup fails
2019-09-06 8:40 ` revert: " Ricard Wanderlof
@ 2019-09-06 10:58 ` Mark Brown
2019-09-06 18:38 ` Sasha Levin
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Mark Brown @ 2019-09-06 10:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Ricard Wanderlof; +Cc: stable, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Sasha Levin, linux-kernel
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 771 bytes --]
On Fri, Sep 06, 2019 at 10:40:01AM +0200, Ricard Wanderlof wrote:
> But is this being dropped from the master branch as well? To me it makes
> the kernel behave in an inconsistent way, first reporting a failure to
> instantiate a specific sound card in the kernel log, but then seemingly
> bringing it up anyway.
No, this is absolutely a good and positive change to have in
master and I'm not suggesting that we should drop it there -
sorry if I sounded like that. I just want to be conservative for
stable so that we don't have anyone updating their stable kernel
and having their audio blow up on them, we don't want to do
anything that'd discourage people from taking stable updates and
hence missing out on security or critical stability updates.
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: revert: ASoC: Fail card instantiation if DAI format setup fails
2019-08-28 7:07 ` Ricard Wanderlof
@ 2019-09-06 8:40 ` Ricard Wanderlof
2019-09-06 10:58 ` Mark Brown
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Ricard Wanderlof @ 2019-09-06 8:40 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: stable, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Mark Brown; +Cc: Sasha Levin, linux-kernel
> > On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 12:00:14PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> > > On Sun, Aug 25, 2019 at 09:35:15PM -0400, Sasha Levin wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Aug 14, 2019 at 10:22:13AM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> > >
> > > > > > If the DAI format setup fails, there is no valid communication format
> > > > > > between CPU and CODEC, so fail card instantiation, rather than
> > > > continue
> > > > > > with a card that will most likely not function properly.
> > >
> > > > > This is another one where if nobody noticed a problem already and things
> > > > > just happened to be working this might break things, it's vanishingly
> > > > > unlikely to fix anything that was broken.
> > >
> > > > Same as the other patch: this patch suggests it fixes a real bug, and if
> > > > this patch is broken let's fix it.
> > >
> > > If anyone ran into this on the older kernel and fixed or worked
> > > around it locally there's a reasonable chance this will then
> > > break what they're doing. The patch itself is perfectly fine but
(Sorry about the mangled subject line, I'd accidentally deleted the
original message from my inbox.)
I'm a bit bewildered here. As the author of the original patch I'm of
course biased, and I can certainly understand the patch being dropped from
existing release branches, since as Mark correctly states, it does not fix
any broken behavior and might even break things that happen to work by
chance.
But is this being dropped from the master branch as well? To me it makes
the kernel behave in an inconsistent way, first reporting a failure to
instantiate a specific sound card in the kernel log, but then seemingly
bringing it up anyway.
/Ricard
--
Ricard Wolf Wanderlof ricardw(at)axis.com
Axis Communications AB, Lund, Sweden www.axis.com
Phone +46 46 272 2016 Fax +46 46 13 61 30
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2019-09-09 9:35 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2019-09-06 15:00 revert: ASoC: Fail card instantiation if DAI format setup fails Ricard Wanderlof
2019-09-06 18:29 ` Sasha Levin
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2019-08-14 2:08 [PATCH AUTOSEL 5.2 001/123] ASoC: simple_card_utils.h: care NULL dai at asoc_simple_debug_dai() Sasha Levin
2019-08-14 2:09 ` [PATCH AUTOSEL 5.2 040/123] ASoC: Fail card instantiation if DAI format setup fails Sasha Levin
2019-08-14 9:22 ` Mark Brown
2019-08-26 1:35 ` Sasha Levin
2019-08-27 11:00 ` Mark Brown
2019-08-28 2:13 ` Sasha Levin
2019-08-28 7:07 ` Ricard Wanderlof
2019-09-06 8:40 ` revert: " Ricard Wanderlof
2019-09-06 10:58 ` Mark Brown
2019-09-06 18:38 ` Sasha Levin
2019-09-09 9:35 ` Mark Brown
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).