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 A1BF1C77B73 for ; Sun, 23 Apr 2023 08:53:09 +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 B15E8F1E; Sun, 23 Apr 2023 10:52:16 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 alsa0.perex.cz B15E8F1E DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=alsa-project.org; s=default; t=1682239986; bh=bw1AY/4dHgOZuHPMP9NGEmf307Wih9rHfZcTVY7/tGo=; h=Date:From:To:Subject:In-Reply-To:CC:List-Id:List-Archive: List-Help:List-Owner:List-Post:List-Subscribe:List-Unsubscribe: From; b=ljByPCXcg8jrxkdyg/tk1qhRbC4KxF7GyYJKjR9yGfxOJekD/uH1fBoSMS59OqYEQ knHzlWnBQj4My9YoJEbrM7fZdb45vqvP7vexMociP7bovVYM8s/KsmRx38ve4GAO8b kKkdR+hPBIiImvCiOLP6QdF7/SdVMLyIZYOxtLfs= Received: from mailman-core.alsa-project.org (mailman-core.alsa-project.org [10.254.200.10]) by alsa1.perex.cz (Postfix) with ESMTP id 51827F800AC; Sun, 23 Apr 2023 10:51:51 +0200 (CEST) Received: by alsa1.perex.cz (Postfix, from userid 50401) id 5785DF80236; Sun, 23 Apr 2023 10:51:47 +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 E8D23F80137 for ; Sun, 23 Apr 2023 10:51:40 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 alsa1.perex.cz E8D23F80137 Received: from ugly.fritz.box (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by bluemchen.kde.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CB0D824215; Sun, 23 Apr 2023 04:51:38 -0400 (EDT) Received: by ugly.fritz.box (masqmail 0.3.4, from userid 1000) id 1pqVRa-BlN-00; Sun, 23 Apr 2023 10:51:38 +0200 Date: Sun, 23 Apr 2023 10:51:38 +0200 From: Oswald Buddenhagen To: Takashi Iwai Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] ALSA: emu10k1: use high-level I/O in set_filterQ() Message-ID: Mail-Followup-To: Takashi Iwai , alsa-devel@alsa-project.org, Jaroslav Kysela MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <87y1mjnj8t.wl-tiwai@suse.de> <878rejoya4.wl-tiwai@suse.de> Message-ID-Hash: UMWUQ5BZXTO4REUFMSYJHJ5A2ROJGIAU X-Message-ID-Hash: UMWUQ5BZXTO4REUFMSYJHJ5A2ROJGIAU 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: 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 Sun, Apr 23, 2023 at 09:25:39AM +0200, Takashi Iwai wrote: >Again, you must have a bit more say here... >For example, you didn't write why this change is needed. >You thought it obvious? No, readers don't know. > it is obvious from the patch - the code becomes much shorter and more legible. and someone who just reads the log/blame wouldn't care, because it doesn't actually explain anything. but whatever. On Sun, Apr 23, 2023 at 09:35:46AM +0200, Takashi Iwai wrote: >On Sat, 22 Apr 2023 18:10:20 +0200, >Oswald Buddenhagen wrote: >> >> ... and also use more pre-defined constants on the way (some of which >> required adjustment). >> >> Signed-off-by: Oswald Buddenhagen > >Applied this one, but skipped the patch 2. > which is funny, because that commit message misses the obvious "why" part as well - it just mentions an additional thing that is unique to this patch. so to be consistent, you should reject both patches and wait for an update. >BTW, it would be really better if we define some macro for the >highlevel I/O definition. It's cumbersome to decode and check >manually at review whether the conversion is correct, and it's >error-prone. > yes, i considered that. i also considered many more refactorings, and had to hold myself back - there are enough nice-to-have patches in this series as-is. i mean, 15 years ago it would have made sense to go crazy, but now the hardware is a bit too obsolete to go much beyond what i actually need for my project. i'm assuming some people outside the western sphere are still using our scrap with linux, but we rarely hear from them, so it's hard to know ... regards