From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mark Brown Subject: Re: [PATCH v5] sound/soc/lapis: add platform driver for ML7213 Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2012 16:54:05 +0800 Message-ID: <20120611085404.GB11439@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> References: <1337941231.1580.19.camel@vkoul-udesk3> <20120527221956.GB25019@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> <20120530121449.GI9947@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> <20120531104538.GA2666@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> <20120601083018.GH24139@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0453561807557445421==" Return-path: Received: from cassiel.sirena.org.uk (cassiel.sirena.org.uk [80.68.93.111]) by alsa0.perex.cz (Postfix) with ESMTP id 717D81041E1 for ; Mon, 11 Jun 2012 10:54:32 +0200 (CEST) In-Reply-To: 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: Tomoya MORINAGA Cc: Vinod Koul , lars@metafoo.de, Takashi Iwai , alsa-devel@alsa-project.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Liam Girdwood List-Id: alsa-devel@alsa-project.org --===============0453561807557445421== Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="H1spWtNR+x+ondvy" Content-Disposition: inline --H1spWtNR+x+ondvy Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 04:05:56PM +0900, Tomoya MORINAGA wrote: > That is to say, some drivers ASoC DMA framework. However some drivers > don't use any ASoC DMA framework. There are some drivers that predate the availibility of the dmaengine framework. > Why didn't you do porting to your saying "ASoC DMA framework"? This, and the fact that the PCH driver uses dmaengine without using any shared code, is the topic of the discussion. It is entirely natural that there are no open coded drivers using cyclic DMA via dmaengine, they have all had that code factored out. Please stop this and at least look at factoring this code out. If it turns out that there's some reason why it's a lot of work that's one thing but it seems clear that you've not even looked yet. It's like the previous issues where you were sending patches which would clearly not run successfully, it's not a very positive approach. --H1spWtNR+x+ondvy Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: Digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux) iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJP1bIhAAoJEBus8iNuMP3ddVgQAJcrfdr+DY+i/KiFN+auDY6E oL96PlUFpLsDZa4WpgDbJyx7NbDezHxNl+mQYiHZZmYqEY+rajfTYZ9TIZXZDutL ccRLYWZ8bzqrsaagCLpBwaZa/SKm30k2rHvmKY1NbvEcXDin00RGm+JTw1NbQJCV zWvOElaTDl+pCSZEK5FKhFfB52HNjYx+3IPCt0rFDeFodmZct4BTV9bWAMEXlJDl L5+OFk3S9Kx8DZycymdYcYKIysHYSW48P7kWXKdMq9/Ef15R1Kd5pmnBtMKUd10W TWWhZO+wbx6LewAenn3s9NHH1RzdFFMTuBoRofnHITPR38MjCo/2z5OTLvecJ1Gq RIXrQ3CMDhFnzIWoXn93nKHDssyDcBciyfPzzwgdLzCzLFiqV5Guk4ufz6atodMJ IxzPGF15StSv6iH3JMc0vgVZMbrlqBcb/6KEWkApgUcF7wiH5zLzCuHIClZreX4X WLEzvNe4v0VNUFnEmTnXcXGJCZc2jDPbBh92aOMEPW6Jy+ds2XYER30cnnMVMyq+ F2+bTB+nQpcaf2OmNw1FkeAYo4v1+liAMVZC07TjUg2hYwBQtB0t/tT36H1YiDki 9oUsp7oA72D/aYcYiBIzdR7CLjiq59691i1Ob70d+uULCZ3gM5+1kPWAsN0UwFSN tRW2Tgmc4yAVnK8kx8rf =PjxK -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --H1spWtNR+x+ondvy-- --===============0453561807557445421== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline --===============0453561807557445421==--