On Fri, 26 May 2017 08:54:27 +0200, Takashi Sakamoto wrote: > > On May 26 2017 15:47, Takashi Iwai wrote: > >>> Queued now, but will be likely declined later due to the rewrites of > >>> the code. > >> > >> Due to your recent work under reviewing? > > > > Yes, the code might be changed heavily. > > Don't touch a too hot spot if it were only a cleanup. > > I've already reviewed it but postpone my reply to this evening. (I'm > in paid work now.) > > Your patchset looks a middle of work. It includes the lack of changes > for each drivers, thus not bisect-able. Yes, it was mentioned so in the cover letter. > I think you will re-post the > full series of patches several days after reviewed. Then you have > chance to rebase it to recent HEAD of your tree, don't you? My patches are already ready. I didn't post the full set just because it's too much. The patch "snippet" was shown as a demonstration. And, why do you think there is only one patchset? Usually I write several different implementations and choose the best one for submission. That is, I already have a few other patchsets in my local tree based on the current code base. And even further works on PCM code are pending. So which is easier to rebase and handle? Which one has more significant changes? A single trivial cleanup patch, or the whole several sets of patchsets? The answer is clear to my eyes. thanks, Takashi _______________________________________________ Alsa-devel mailing list Alsa-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://mailman.alsa-project.org/mailman/listinfo/alsa-devel
