From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Nenghua Cao <nhcao@marvell.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ASOC:DAPM: extend dapm kcontrol to support
 runtime route update
Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2013 19:33:46 +0800
Message-ID: <52AAF09A.40302@marvell.com>
References: <1386835619-18070-1-git-send-email-nhcao@marvell.com>
 <20131212104347.GH11044@sirena.org.uk>
 <F766E4F80769BD478052FB6533FA745D4E76B8FA79@SC-VEXCH4.marvell.com>
 <20131212110718.GI11044@sirena.org.uk>
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 mx0b-0016f401.pphosted.com (mx0b-0016f401.pphosted.com
 [67.231.156.173])
 by alsa0.perex.cz (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7CD3C261631
 for <alsa-devel@alsa-project.org>; Fri, 13 Dec 2013 12:28:09 +0100 (CET)
In-Reply-To: <20131212110718.GI11044@sirena.org.uk>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://mailman.alsa-project.org/mailman/options/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>
Errors-To: alsa-devel-bounces@alsa-project.org
Sender: alsa-devel-bounces@alsa-project.org
To: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
Cc: "alsa-devel@alsa-project.org" <alsa-devel@alsa-project.org>, Takashi Iwai <tiwai@suse.de>, Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@gmail.com>, Henry Zhao <xzhao10@marvell.com>, Yacine Belkadi <yacine.belkadi.1@gmail.com>, Chao Xie <cxie4@marvell.com>
List-Id: alsa-devel@alsa-project.org

Hi, Mark:

On 12/12/2013 07:07 PM, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 02:56:08AM -0800, Nenghua Cao wrote:
> 
> Don't top post.  Please also fix your mailer to word wrap within
> paragaphs, it makes your mails much more legible.
> 
It is my fault and Thanks for your kindly reminder. I just made my
mailer work as community's request.
>> >    For common mix/mux which aren't related with DPCM, it doesn't need
>> >    to do DPCM update. And it still can use the old controls. But for
>> >    the mix/mux which impacts fe<->be link, they need to do this works.
>> >    For them, they call use the new set of controls. I think it can
>> >    make our code has better backward-compatibility.
> How does this improve backwards compatibility?
My thought is that we distinguish different requirement through flag
(you can find dpcm_checked in my patch).

Thanks