Message-ID: <52F507E9.9050502@wwwdotorg.org>
Date: Fri, 07 Feb 2014 09:20:57 -0700
From: Stephen Warren <swarren@wwwdotorg.org>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.2.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Luis Henriques <luis.henriques@canonical.com>,
        Levente Kurusa <levex@linux.com>
CC: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, stable@vger.kernel.org,
        kernel-team@lists.ubuntu.com, Anssi Hannula <anssi.hannula@iki.fi>,
        Takashi Iwai <tiwai@suse.de>, Stephen Warren <swarren@nvidia.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3.11 229/233] ALSA: hda - hdmi: introduce patch_nvhdmi()
References: <1391773652-25214-1-git-send-email-luis.henriques@canonical.com> <1391773652-25214-230-git-send-email-luis.henriques@canonical.com> <52F4CA77.5060007@linux.com> <20140207143629.GB5499@hercules>
In-Reply-To: <20140207143629.GB5499@hercules>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org

On 02/07/2014 07:36 AM, Luis Henriques wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 07, 2014 at 12:58:47PM +0100, Levente Kurusa wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> On 02/07/2014 12:47 PM, Luis Henriques wrote:
>>> 3.11.10.4 -stable review patch.  If anyone has any objections, please let me know.
>>>  [...]
>>>  
>>> +static int patch_nvhdmi(struct hda_codec *codec)
>>> +{
>>> +	struct hdmi_spec *spec;
>>> +	int err;
>>> +
>>> +	err = patch_generic_hdmi(codec);
>>> +	if (err)
>>> +		return err;
>>> +
>>> +	spec = codec->spec;
>>> +
>>> +	return 0;
>>> +}
>>> [...]
>>
>> Is it just me or is it that the 'spec' variable has no use?
> 
> This does seem a little bit odd indeed.  I've picked the backport provided
> by Stephen, which has been queued for the 3.10 and 3.12 stable kernels as
> well.  The original patch actually modifies the ops field in the hdmi_spec
> struct, however this field doesn't exist in this kernel version.
> 
> Stephen, could you please comment?  Since this is just a partial backport
> of 611885bc963a ("ALSA: hda - hdmi: Disallow unsupported 2ch remapping on
> NVIDIA codecs"), I'm assuming this is correct -- although the spec
> variable could have been dropped.

The very next patch of mine to this file (in other stable releases)
makes use of the spec variable. I kept the addition of the spec variable
in this patch, even though it isn't used until the next patch, so that
it stayed as part of the backport of this patch which originally added
it, rather than moving it to the other patch I backported, and hence
mixing up multiple upstream patches in the same backported patch.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/