From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Dimitris Papastamos <dp@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ASoC: soc-dapm: Fix breakage with
	incorrect codec	pointer
Date: Sun, 19 Jun 2011 18:01:26 +0100
Message-ID: <20110619170126.GA31485@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>
References: <1308322347-13512-1-git-send-email-dp@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>
	<4DFB77AA.8060803@ti.com>
	<20110617160153.GA11241@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>
	<20110618141046.GA4065@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>
	<20110618144102.GB15674@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <alsa-devel-bounces@alsa-project.org>
Received: from opensource2.wolfsonmicro.com (opensource.wolfsonmicro.com
	[80.75.67.52]) by alsa0.perex.cz (Postfix) with ESMTP id B19281037F3
	for <alsa-devel@alsa-project.org>;
	Sun, 19 Jun 2011 19:01:31 +0200 (CEST)
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20110618144102.GB15674@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://mailman.alsa-project.org/mailman/listinfo/alsa-devel>,
	<mailto:alsa-devel-request@alsa-project.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://mailman.alsa-project.org/pipermail/alsa-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:alsa-devel@alsa-project.org>
List-Help: <mailto:alsa-devel-request@alsa-project.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://mailman.alsa-project.org/mailman/listinfo/alsa-devel>,
	<mailto:alsa-devel-request@alsa-project.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: alsa-devel-bounces@alsa-project.org
Errors-To: alsa-devel-bounces@alsa-project.org
To: Mark Brown <broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>
Cc: "alsa-devel@alsa-project.org" <alsa-devel@alsa-project.org>, "patches@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com" <patches@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>, Liam Girdwood <lrg@ti.com>
List-Id: alsa-devel@alsa-project.org

On Sat, Jun 18, 2011 at 03:41:02PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 18, 2011 at 03:10:46PM +0100, Dimitris Papastamos wrote:
> 
> > Yes that's true.  That was a quick fix to temporarily take care of this
> > problem.
> 
> With something like this I think it's probably as well to just revert
> the original commit until we've got things sorted out, having the
> feature sort of implemented but totally unusuble is probably worse than
> not having it at all.

Yea indeed.