From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from alsa0.perex.cz (alsa0.perex.cz [77.48.224.243]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2ACB5C77B78 for ; Thu, 4 May 2023 13:55:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: from alsa1.perex.cz (alsa1.perex.cz [207.180.221.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by alsa0.perex.cz (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3FC851687; Thu, 4 May 2023 15:54:49 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 alsa0.perex.cz 3FC851687 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=alsa-project.org; s=default; t=1683208539; bh=fdsaPGcE7oM7olyNAYFkiOggY299leY3iDdcWkhjX1Q=; h=Date:From:To:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:CC:List-Id: List-Archive:List-Help:List-Owner:List-Post:List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe:From; b=eHC34bS6WSdaWQNvyT4sjAoUq/+R1PusS6WQOVmCCmfHYxs6hg/7vNVMtachyS71s y/kytTU0aLD8upMQvbvLjb8bV05KqyKxzpRZXBccwUNo4NpDoNPNM+NlR/nAYJ25X+ lE/GohMdPk6XiYmxEfAzolWSuZREohi94GJr5X4w= Received: from mailman-core.alsa-project.org (mailman-core.alsa-project.org [10.254.200.10]) by alsa1.perex.cz (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9C43DF80114; Thu, 4 May 2023 15:54:23 +0200 (CEST) Received: by alsa1.perex.cz (Postfix, from userid 50401) id 001EDF8052D; Thu, 4 May 2023 15:54:20 +0200 (CEST) Received: from bluemchen.kde.org (bluemchen.kde.org [IPv6:2001:470:142:8::100]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by alsa1.perex.cz (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9BF38F80114 for ; Thu, 4 May 2023 15:54:17 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 alsa1.perex.cz 9BF38F80114 Received: from ugly.fritz.box (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by bluemchen.kde.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 61B6323E69; Thu, 4 May 2023 09:54:15 -0400 (EDT) Received: by ugly.fritz.box (masqmail 0.3.4, from userid 1000) id 1puZPT-Hec-00; Thu, 04 May 2023 15:54:15 +0200 Date: Thu, 4 May 2023 15:54:15 +0200 From: Oswald Buddenhagen To: Jaroslav Kysela Subject: Re: [PATCH] ALSA: pcm: fix snd_pcm_playback_silence() with free-running mode Message-ID: Mail-Followup-To: Jaroslav Kysela , Takashi Iwai , alsa-devel@alsa-project.org References: <20230504130007.2208916-1-oswald.buddenhagen@gmx.de> <87cz3gkyz9.wl-tiwai@suse.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Message-ID-Hash: JNYQLHWA7HUIUHUS4NKIVN6KDJ2UTY27 X-Message-ID-Hash: JNYQLHWA7HUIUHUS4NKIVN6KDJ2UTY27 X-MailFrom: ossi@kde.org X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency; loop; banned-address; member-moderation; header-match-alsa-devel.alsa-project.org-0; header-match-alsa-devel.alsa-project.org-1; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header CC: Takashi Iwai , alsa-devel@alsa-project.org X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.8 Precedence: list List-Id: "Alsa-devel mailing list for ALSA developers - http://www.alsa-project.org" Archived-At: List-Archive: List-Help: List-Owner: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: On Thu, May 04, 2023 at 03:33:01PM +0200, Jaroslav Kysela wrote: >On 04. 05. 23 15:28, Takashi Iwai wrote: >> Honestly speaking, this is really hard to review. >> As most of changes here are the revert of the previous commit, >> no they aren't. >>I'd rather like to get it >> reverted whole once, and re-apply the proper fix gradually. > >I fully agree here. Takashi, please, revert the broken patch right now. > actually reverting would include reverting the comments, which would be just plain stupid. >I think that the review and improving the code may take some days. > i'm not going to deliver anything more on that matter just to satisfy some arbitrary process. i think the patch does the right thing, with the right granularity, and i'm not going to spend time breaking my head on producing broken intermediate states which i cannot properly reason about due to their internal inconsistency. you can "rebase" my patch by checking it out on top of a partial revert, but you need to come up with your own commit message then. and i think that it would be utterly counterproductive. viewing the diff for review purposes may make sense, though. regards