Mark Brown wrote: > On Tue, May 12, 2009 at 11:59:03AM +0200, Karl Beldan wrote: >> Mark Brown wrote: > >>> That doesn't seem to tie up - I can see the initialisation changing the >>> behaviour on first run but it seems surprising that this should happen >>> on subsequent runs too. Alternatively, is your initialisation patch >>> safe to apply by itself? > >> Well 2/4 stops the clocks only if both REC and RPL are disabled. >> Without 1/4 you end up with REC enabled at startup. >> In a scenario where you have never used REC you end up RPLing with REC always on. >> REC being on at shutdown(),clocks won't stop. > > Yet they are being stopped by something... > You said that clocks are NOT stopped when applying patch 2/4 without 1/4. I detailed a fairly likely code path. >>> As previously discussed you need to rework the patch to not do the reset >>> on initial probe not when the module is loaded, you need to address this >>> rather than reposting. > >> The patch in question is moving the reset in probe rather than module init - with comment updated. >> What is wrong ? > > A repost is where you send exactly the same thing again. When you say > you're reposting something it means you've not made any changes; if you > say that's what you're doing and your code has problems that need to be > fixed it's fairly obvious that all the previous comments are going to > continue to apply. > When I said I 'resent' it, my meaning was not to let you understand that I did not modify it obviously. >>> I'll try to find time to re-review the series but I'm going to need to >>> sit down with the datasheet and check this in much more detail. > >> For 1/4 and 2/4 there should not be great need, Really. > > There's been enough stuff with the series that I've got a few alarm > bells ringing, if only with obscure relationships between the patches. I could say the same about the current status and handling but I will ask you to point precise points instead, please. As of the current status of the driver there is not even full duplex, maintainance is likewise. The patches I am sending are quite easy to discuss. Could you point what is wrong in the code or comments ? Nitpicking about "A repost is where you send exactly the same thing again." and talking so much about pb applying 2/4 without 1/4 really sucks. I said and am saying my patches improve greatly the code quality/functionnality, if you think otherwise, give tangible reasons and I'll be really happy to discuss/rework/abandon the patches. Since I have no feedback from Maintainers, I am pinging the original author hoping I won't disturb too much. -- Karl _______________________________________________ Alsa-devel mailing list Alsa-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://mailman.alsa-project.org/mailman/listinfo/alsa-devel
