Re: [PATCH v3 2/5] soundwire: fix style issues

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 4/30/19 3:51 AM, Vinod Koul wrote:
On 15-04-19, 08:09, Pierre-Louis Bossart wrote:


Signed-off-by: Pierre-Louis Bossart <pierre-louis.bossart@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
   drivers/soundwire/Kconfig          |   2 +-
   drivers/soundwire/bus.c            |  87 ++++++++--------
   drivers/soundwire/bus.h            |  16 +--
   drivers/soundwire/bus_type.c       |   4 +-
   drivers/soundwire/cadence_master.c |  87 ++++++++--------
   drivers/soundwire/cadence_master.h |  22 ++--
   drivers/soundwire/intel.c          |  87 ++++++++--------
   drivers/soundwire/intel.h          |   4 +-
   drivers/soundwire/intel_init.c     |  12 +--
   drivers/soundwire/mipi_disco.c     | 116 +++++++++++----------
   drivers/soundwire/slave.c          |  10 +-
   drivers/soundwire/stream.c         | 161 +++++++++++++++--------------

I would prefer this to be a patch per module. It doesnt help to have a
single patch for all the files!

It would be great to have cleanup done per logical group, for example
typos in a patch, aligns in another etc...

You've got to be kidding. I've never seen people ask for this sort of
detail.

Nope this is the way it should be. A patch is patch and which
should do one thing! Even if it is a cleanup one.

I dislike a patch which touches everything, core, modules, so please
split up. As a said in review it takes guesswork to find why a change
was done, was it whitespace fix, indentation or not, so please split up
based on type of fixes.

With all due respect, you are not helping here but rather slowing things down. I've done dozens of cleanups in the ALSA tree and I didn't go in this sort of details. The fact that the series was tagged as Reviewed by Takashi on April 11 and we are still discussing trivial changes tells me the integration model is broken. It's not just me, the patches related to runtime-pm from your own Linaro colleagues posted on March 28 went nowhere either.

Moving forward, I suggest we merge SoundWire-related patches through the sound tree. There will be dependencies in the coming weeks between SOF and SoundWire and it makes no sense to have separate maintainers and make the life of early adopters more complicated than it needs to be. If we have 3-week delays for trivial stuff, I can't imagine what the pace will be when I publish the next 20-odd patches I am still working on, and the code needed for the SoundWire audio device class being standardized as we speak. Things were fine up to now since no one was actually using the code, we are in a different model now.
_______________________________________________
Alsa-devel mailing list
Alsa-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://mailman.alsa-project.org/mailman/listinfo/alsa-devel



[Index of Archives]     [ALSA User]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Pulse Audio]     [Kernel Archive]     [Asterisk PBX]     [Photo Sharing]     [Linux Sound]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]

  Powered by Linux