| Message ID | 20220627094335.3051210-1-ckeepax@opensource.cirrus.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Superseded |
| Headers | show |
| Series | ASoC: samsung: s3c24xx-i2s: Fix typo in DAIFMT handling | expand |
On 27/06/2022 11:43, Charles Keepax wrote: > The conversion of the set_fmt callback to direct clock specification > included a small typo, correct the affected code. > > Fixes: 91c49199e6d6 ("ASoC: samsung: Update to use set_fmt_new callback") Where is this commit from? It's not in next. > Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com> You should put such big patchsets in your own repo (e.g. on Github/Gitlab) and feed it to linux-next or at least to LKP. This way you would get build coverage... because it seems the build was missing in your case. If you prefer not to include it in LKP or linux-next, no problem, but then you need to build it. > Signed-off-by: Charles Keepax <ckeepax@opensource.cirrus.com> > --- Reviewed-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> Best regards, Krzysztof
On Mon, Jun 27, 2022 at 11:49:46AM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > On 27/06/2022 11:43, Charles Keepax wrote: > > The conversion of the set_fmt callback to direct clock specification > > included a small typo, correct the affected code. > > Fixes: 91c49199e6d6 ("ASoC: samsung: Update to use set_fmt_new callback") > Where is this commit from? It's not in next. 0b491c7c1b2555ef08285fd49a8567f2f9f34ff8 - if you can't find something search for the subject, people often get things wrong. > You should put such big patchsets in your own repo (e.g. on > Github/Gitlab) and feed it to linux-next or at least to LKP. The size of the patch set isn't really relevant here, the same issue can apply to anything that can be built in more than one configuration. People should of course try to do things that work but equally we shouldn't be putting procedural blockers in place, we have integration trees for a reason. > This way you would get build coverage... because it seems the build was > missing in your case. That coverage has apparently also been missing in -next for several weeks.
On 27/06/2022 13:45, Mark Brown wrote: > On Mon, Jun 27, 2022 at 11:49:46AM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >> On 27/06/2022 11:43, Charles Keepax wrote: >>> The conversion of the set_fmt callback to direct clock specification >>> included a small typo, correct the affected code. > >>> Fixes: 91c49199e6d6 ("ASoC: samsung: Update to use set_fmt_new callback") > >> Where is this commit from? It's not in next. > > 0b491c7c1b2555ef08285fd49a8567f2f9f34ff8 - if you can't find something > search for the subject, people often get things wrong. Finding it by subject does not solve problem with Fixes tag, that it might be pointing to incorrect commit (e.g. rebased). > >> You should put such big patchsets in your own repo (e.g. on >> Github/Gitlab) and feed it to linux-next or at least to LKP. > > The size of the patch set isn't really relevant here, the same issue can > apply to anything that can be built in more than one configuration. > People should of course try to do things that work but equally we > shouldn't be putting procedural blockers in place, we have integration > trees for a reason. I would say that size of the patchset is a proof someone is doing bigger work and we want the bigger work to be tested even before hitting maintainer's tree. My comment was not a requirement (procedural blocker) but a suggestion, because maybe Charles was not aware that developer trees can be tested for free. > >> This way you would get build coverage... because it seems the build was >> missing in your case. > > That coverage has apparently also been missing in -next for several > weeks. Eh, it seems defconfigs for this old platform do not select sound, so we rely on randconfig. :( Best regards, Krzysztof
On Mon, Jun 27, 2022 at 02:11:13PM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > On 27/06/2022 13:45, Mark Brown wrote: > > On Mon, Jun 27, 2022 at 11:49:46AM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > >> On 27/06/2022 11:43, Charles Keepax wrote: > >>> The conversion of the set_fmt callback to direct clock specification > >>> included a small typo, correct the affected code. > > > >>> Fixes: 91c49199e6d6 ("ASoC: samsung: Update to use set_fmt_new callback") > > > >> Where is this commit from? It's not in next. > > > > 0b491c7c1b2555ef08285fd49a8567f2f9f34ff8 - if you can't find something > > search for the subject, people often get things wrong. > > Finding it by subject does not solve problem with Fixes tag, that it > might be pointing to incorrect commit (e.g. rebased). > Apologies I will resend with the SHA corrected there and sorry about missing the issue in the first place. I was pretty careful trying to make sure I built everything but somehow missed this one. Thanks, Charles
On Mon, Jun 27, 2022 at 02:11:13PM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > On 27/06/2022 13:45, Mark Brown wrote: > > On Mon, Jun 27, 2022 at 11:49:46AM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > >> On 27/06/2022 11:43, Charles Keepax wrote: > My comment was not a requirement (procedural blocker) but a suggestion, > because maybe Charles was not aware that developer trees can be tested > for free. > Would be awesome if I could run things through the build bot before sending them up. Are there any docs anywhere on how to get a tree added to that? Thanks, Charles
On 27/06/2022 15:16, Charles Keepax wrote: > On Mon, Jun 27, 2022 at 02:11:13PM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >> On 27/06/2022 13:45, Mark Brown wrote: >>> On Mon, Jun 27, 2022 at 11:49:46AM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >>>> On 27/06/2022 11:43, Charles Keepax wrote: >> My comment was not a requirement (procedural blocker) but a suggestion, >> because maybe Charles was not aware that developer trees can be tested >> for free. >> > > Would be awesome if I could run things through the build bot > before sending them up. Are there any docs anywhere on how to get > a tree added to that? For LKP: https://github.com/intel/lkp-tests/pull/139 Sometimes intermediate work is also included in linux-next: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-next/?q=s%3Ainclude+s%3Atree Best regards, Krzysztof
On Mon, Jun 27, 2022 at 02:11:13PM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > On 27/06/2022 13:45, Mark Brown wrote: > > On Mon, Jun 27, 2022 at 11:49:46AM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > > 0b491c7c1b2555ef08285fd49a8567f2f9f34ff8 - if you can't find something > > search for the subject, people often get things wrong. > Finding it by subject does not solve problem with Fixes tag, that it > might be pointing to incorrect commit (e.g. rebased). Sure, but that's an incorrect SHA rather than not being able to find the commit which is what you said. > >> This way you would get build coverage... because it seems the build was > >> missing in your case. > > That coverage has apparently also been missing in -next for several > > weeks. > Eh, it seems defconfigs for this old platform do not select sound, so we > rely on randconfig. :( It's not even turning up in an allmodconfig?
On 27/06/2022 15:23, Mark Brown wrote: >>> That coverage has apparently also been missing in -next for several >>> weeks. > >> Eh, it seems defconfigs for this old platform do not select sound, so we >> rely on randconfig. :( > > It's not even turning up in an allmodconfig? No, because it is old driver for S3C24xx platform which: 1. Does not have compile test (I can try to fix that), 2. Depends on/Is selected by S3C24xx code which is not multiplatform thus is not enabled on ARM allyes/allmod. Best regards, Krzysztof
On Mon, 27 Jun 2022 10:43:35 +0100, Charles Keepax wrote: > The conversion of the set_fmt callback to direct clock specification > included a small typo, correct the affected code. > > Applied to https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/broonie/sound.git for-next Thanks! [1/1] ASoC: samsung: s3c24xx-i2s: Fix typo in DAIFMT handling commit: ccb0bbe3e93efa1c794176200785737ba65b0131 All being well this means that it will be integrated into the linux-next tree (usually sometime in the next 24 hours) and sent to Linus during the next merge window (or sooner if it is a bug fix), however if problems are discovered then the patch may be dropped or reverted. You may get further e-mails resulting from automated or manual testing and review of the tree, please engage with people reporting problems and send followup patches addressing any issues that are reported if needed. If any updates are required or you are submitting further changes they should be sent as incremental updates against current git, existing patches will not be replaced. Please add any relevant lists and maintainers to the CCs when replying to this mail. Thanks, Mark
diff --git a/sound/soc/samsung/s3c24xx-i2s.c b/sound/soc/samsung/s3c24xx-i2s.c index 4082ad7cbcc11..c1a314b86b155 100644 --- a/sound/soc/samsung/s3c24xx-i2s.c +++ b/sound/soc/samsung/s3c24xx-i2s.c @@ -170,7 +170,7 @@ static int s3c24xx_i2s_set_fmt(struct snd_soc_dai *cpu_dai, pr_debug("hw_params r: IISMOD: %x \n", iismod); switch (fmt & SND_SOC_DAIFMT_CLOCK_PROVIDER_MASK) { - case SND_SOC_DAIFMT_BC_CFC: + case SND_SOC_DAIFMT_BC_FC: iismod |= S3C2410_IISMOD_SLAVE; break; case SND_SOC_DAIFMT_BP_FP:
The conversion of the set_fmt callback to direct clock specification included a small typo, correct the affected code. Fixes: 91c49199e6d6 ("ASoC: samsung: Update to use set_fmt_new callback") Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Charles Keepax <ckeepax@opensource.cirrus.com> --- sound/soc/samsung/s3c24xx-i2s.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)