Hi Pierre-Louis, again
+1 question.
I know you already have dailink cleanup for Intel drivers.
To avoid conflict, do you want to me do nothing for these ?
> Thank you for your feedback
>
> > > +/*
> > > + * Sample 1 : Single CPU/Codec/Platform
> > > + *
> > > + * SND_SOC_DAILINK_DEFS(test,
> > > + * DAILINK_COMPONENT_ARRAY(COMPONENT_FE("cpu_dai")),
> > > + * DAILINK_COMPONENT_ARRAY(COMPONENT_BE("codec", "codec_dai")),
> > > + * DAILINK_COMPONENT_ARRAY(COMPONENT_DMA("platform")));
> >
> > the syntax looks fine, but the _FE/_BE/_DMA suffix is a bit
> > misleading. The _FE in the examples is actually a DPCM BE, and the _BE
> > is really a codec which isn't related to DPCM at all, and platform has
> > typically nothing to do with DMA?
>
> Thanks.
> Yeah, I notice it was not good naming.
> Thank you for pointing it !
>
> > Why not keep the initial conventions and use e.g. COMPONENT_CPU,
> > COMPONENT_CODEC, COMPONENT_PLATFORM to avoid introducing new concepts?
> > If it's starting to be too many letters, then we can use the COMP
> > acronym e.g DAILINK_COMP_ARRAY(COMP_CPU("cpu_dai"))
>
> rollback to CPU/CODEC/PLATFORM is better idea,
> and COMP_xxx is perfect idea !
>
> Thanks, I will start to use it.
>
> Thank you for your help !!
> Best regards
> ---
> Kuninori Morimoto
> _______________________________________________
> Alsa-devel mailing list
> Alsa-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> https://mailman.alsa-project.org/mailman/listinfo/alsa-devel
_______________________________________________
Alsa-devel mailing list
Alsa-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://mailman.alsa-project.org/mailman/listinfo/alsa-devel
