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 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.3 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 325EFCA90AF for ; Tue, 12 May 2020 16:36:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F168720720 for ; Tue, 12 May 2020 16:36:34 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1589301395; bh=91nyVE8ReRAiTTKEOFm9HnxmsFsnbrrzeLeNSCnCH8U=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:List-ID:From; b=Qngcf0Uh4Td2whIzqNYf7SAvgS6AyuO+uF2T/y2G4BtxFZzfuJunKpjjyS4S2EAyS VHqNO9/VmDtbNE5Yuj6TTtTtNSISR37VXozmKKZuujbLmoJWvyitcZQtvkSM/XfPoL Hn7FN7L5LOe7o02zA6crDgA/J9LaogwuBw1gSWOk= Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726324AbgELQge (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 May 2020 12:36:34 -0400 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:35612 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725851AbgELQge (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 May 2020 12:36:34 -0400 Received: from sol.localdomain (c-107-3-166-239.hsd1.ca.comcast.net [107.3.166.239]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 7B03C206CC; Tue, 12 May 2020 16:36:33 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1589301393; bh=91nyVE8ReRAiTTKEOFm9HnxmsFsnbrrzeLeNSCnCH8U=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=IUJYxFgzVQMqKDBkD7MDLV8ejclwyguVwqo4hIrkfXRRwh44UVV3rKXV3o/Bahe7a 2wQpnvD0MzW4TqvJQpkoQrqjnCB0FeaL0sYW5RoRnp/aNzvcvvneUKvFAK9J1mY4nA k2V3WGe1AoGhCSS4USPxyyq+7ORETR9s2+Of8a10= Date: Tue, 12 May 2020 09:36:32 -0700 From: Eric Biggers To: Mark Brown Cc: Stephen Rothwell , Liam Girdwood , Herbert Xu , Linux Crypto List , Linux Next Mailing List , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Arnd Bergmann Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the sound-asoc tree with the crypto tree Message-ID: <20200512163632.GA916@sol.localdomain> References: <20200512144949.4f933eca@canb.auug.org.au> <20200512162205.GI5110@sirena.org.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20200512162205.GI5110@sirena.org.uk> Sender: linux-next-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-next@vger.kernel.org On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 05:22:05PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote: > On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 02:49:49PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > Today's linux-next merge of the sound-asoc tree got a conflict in: > > > > sound/soc/codecs/cros_ec_codec.c > > > > between commit: > > > > 85fc78b80f15 ("ASoC: cros_ec_codec: use crypto_shash_tfm_digest()") > > > > Oh, this is the first I've heard of that patch :( > > > from the crypto tree and commit: > > > a1304cba816e ("ASoC: cros_ec_codec: allocate shash_desc dynamically") > > > from the sound-asoc tree. I Cc'ed it to the people listed in MAINTAINERS for "CHROMEOS EC CODEC DRIVER". I guess wasn't enough and I should have added alsa-devel@alsa-project.org too? > > > I fixed it up (I just used the former) and can carry the fix as > > necessary. This is now fixed as far as linux-next is concerned, but any > > non trivial conflicts should be mentioned to your upstream maintainer > > when your tree is submitted for merging. You may also want to consider > > cooperating with the maintainer of the conflicting tree to minimise any > > particularly complex conflicts. > > That doesn't seem ideal - Eric, Herbert can we get a branch with the > crypto patches in them to pull into the ASoC tree or something? We should just drop one of the patches. If you just want to eliminate the compiler warning about stack usage in wov_hotword_model_put(), then my patch in cryptodev would be better, as it moves the stack allocation into another function in another file. Alternatively, if you actually need to reduce the total stack usage (across all functions), then the kmalloc() patch in sound-asoc would be better. Which do you prefer? - Eric