From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mark Brown Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 1/3] ASoC: da7210: Add support for DAPM Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2011 11:23:50 +0100 Message-ID: <20111021102350.GA4080@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> References: <1319119369.24621.84.camel@matrix> <20111021085838.GE3513@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> <1319190446.24621.158.camel@matrix> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from opensource.wolfsonmicro.com (opensource.wolfsonmicro.com [80.75.67.52]) by alsa0.perex.cz (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0457524518 for ; Fri, 21 Oct 2011 12:23:54 +0200 (CEST) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1319190446.24621.158.camel@matrix> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: alsa-devel-bounces@alsa-project.org Errors-To: alsa-devel-bounces@alsa-project.org To: Ashish Chavan Cc: linux-kernel , alsa-devel , lrg , "kuninori.morimoto.gx" , David Dajun Chen List-Id: alsa-devel@alsa-project.org On Fri, Oct 21, 2011 at 03:17:26PM +0530, Ashish Chavan wrote: > On Fri, 2011-10-21 at 09:58 +0100, Mark Brown wrote: > > This explanation would better placed next to the code in the probe - > > it's that code which looks out of place in a Linux driver. > Only problem with that is the code to enable individual IOs is not at > one place and is scattered in the probe(). Should I place all such > things in a single block in probe() and put the comment above that? That sounds like a good idea - it's fine to split them up per feature being enabled but if the big comment is in front of all of them that'd be really helpful. From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754055Ab1JUKXy (ORCPT ); Fri, 21 Oct 2011 06:23:54 -0400 Received: from opensource.wolfsonmicro.com ([80.75.67.52]:39991 "EHLO opensource.wolfsonmicro.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753397Ab1JUKXx (ORCPT ); Fri, 21 Oct 2011 06:23:53 -0400 Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2011 11:23:50 +0100 From: Mark Brown To: Ashish Chavan Cc: lrg , alsa-devel , David Dajun Chen , "kuninori.morimoto.gx" , linux-kernel Subject: Re: [alsa-devel] [PATCH v7 1/3] ASoC: da7210: Add support for DAPM Message-ID: <20111021102350.GA4080@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> References: <1319119369.24621.84.camel@matrix> <20111021085838.GE3513@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> <1319190446.24621.158.camel@matrix> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1319190446.24621.158.camel@matrix> X-Cookie: You will soon forget this. User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Oct 21, 2011 at 03:17:26PM +0530, Ashish Chavan wrote: > On Fri, 2011-10-21 at 09:58 +0100, Mark Brown wrote: > > This explanation would better placed next to the code in the probe - > > it's that code which looks out of place in a Linux driver. > Only problem with that is the code to enable individual IOs is not at > one place and is scattered in the probe(). Should I place all such > things in a single block in probe() and put the comment above that? That sounds like a good idea - it's fine to split them up per feature being enabled but if the big comment is in front of all of them that'd be really helpful.