From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Peter Ujfalusi Subject: Re: [PATCH v5] ASoC: Apply msbits constraint for sample size bigger than the msbits Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2012 17:43:28 +0100 Message-ID: <4F16F6B0.7030707@ti.com> References: <1326899114-26979-1-git-send-email-peter.ujfalusi@ti.com> <20120118152905.GP8732@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: Received: from na3sys009aog105.obsmtp.com (na3sys009aog105.obsmtp.com [74.125.149.75]) by alsa0.perex.cz (Postfix) with ESMTP id E89AC24670 for ; Wed, 18 Jan 2012 17:43:46 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail-yw0-f54.google.com with SMTP id s35so1572183yhf.27 for ; Wed, 18 Jan 2012 08:43:30 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <20120118152905.GP8732@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> 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: Mark Brown Cc: alsa-devel@alsa-project.org, Liam Girdwood List-Id: alsa-devel@alsa-project.org On 01/18/2012 04:29 PM, Mark Brown wrote: > I'm not sure this is actually a legibility improvement, if anything it's > probably less clear than the original as now the setup of the loop is > spread even further around the function. Would it make it clearer if I set i to 0 right before the while? >> Most of the drivers require 24/32 configuration, so not point of looping >> for smaller sample sizes. > = > Performance isn't really a concern in this path unless we do something > totally insane. Thinking time on the part of the reader needs to be > considered too... Sure it is not a concern. These small 'Performance isn't really a concern in this path' at the end ads up that we need faster CPUs to have the same perceived perfomrance. -- = P=E9ter