On Wed, 2012-04-25 at 10:45 +0200, Peter Meerwald wrote: > Hello Tanu, > > > --- > > src/modules/echo-cancel/module-echo-cancel.c | 2 +- > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > I am wondering how you came up with these echo-cancel related patches? > are there concrete issues you are fixing, is it code reading/review? > > is there some regression testing in place? the EC module is big and > non-trivial > > what is the situation where this problem triggers? > > I am not complaining about a specific patch you submitted, just concerned > about the testability of the EC stuff As part of reviewing a patch for adding assertions to pa_memblockq_push() calls where safe, I'm investigating whether it's safe to assert that the pa_memblockq_push() calls in module-echo-cancel always succeed. During that investigation I've noticed some unrelated problems in the echo-cancel code, resulting in these patches. I have not tested the patches (testing them would probably be rather tricky). I did ask Arun about this sample dropping patch before preparing it, though, and it looked like a bug to him also. Asking for testing is good, but sometimes testing just too hard to do, and leaving a likely bug unfixed doesn't sound like a good idea. -- Tanu
