On 12/14/23 17:53, Cristian Ciocaltea wrote:
On 12/11/23 07:58, Venkata Prasad Potturu wrote:
On 12/10/23 21:20, Cristian Ciocaltea wrote:
On 12/10/23 16:01, Mark Brown wrote:
On Sun, Dec 10, 2023 at 12:12:53PM +0200, Cristian Ciocaltea wrote:
On 12/10/23 11:51, Venkata Prasad Potturu wrote:
This should send to SOF git repo for rewiew, once SOF reviewers
approved
this, again need to send to broonie git.
All the changes in sound/soc/sof/ path should go to SOF git.
Unfortunately I'm not familiar with the SOF dev workflow. So it's not
enough to have this patch cc-ed to
sound-open-firmware@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx?
The SOF people basically do their own thing in github at
https://github.com/thesofproject/linux
with a github workflow and submit their patches upstream in batches a
few times a release, however my understanding is that their workflow can
cope with things going in directly upstream as well.
Thanks for clarifying, Mark! That would greatly simplify and speedup
the whole process, at least for trivial patches like this one.
Hi Cristian,
We have created a Pull request in SOF git hub for I2S BT support.
please hold v2 version SOF patches till below PR get's merged.
PR:- https://github.com/thesofproject/linux/pull/4742
Hi Venkata,
If this is going to be handled via the github workflow, this patch
should be removed from the series. Since there is no dependency on it,
I cannot see a reason to put v2 on hold.
Do I miss something?
Non-sof driver related patches can directly send to broonie git ad v2
series.
SOF driver patches should send to SOF github to avoid merge conflicts
as per guidelines of SOF community.
Thanks,
Cristian
[Index of Archives]
[Pulseaudio]
[Linux Audio Users]
[ALSA Devel]
[Fedora Desktop]
[Fedora SELinux]
[Big List of Linux Books]
[Yosemite News]
[KDE Users]