From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Takashi Iwai <tiwai@suse.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 082/102] ASoC: Add SOC_ENUM_SINGLE_CONST()
	and SOC_ENUM_DOUBLE_CONST() macros
Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2014 15:56:11 +0100
Message-ID: <s5hmwhlvnn8.wl%tiwai@suse.de>
References: <1392724308-13375-1-git-send-email-tiwai@suse.de>
 <1392724308-13375-2-git-send-email-tiwai@suse.de>
 <20140220023339.GR2669@sirena.org.uk>
 <s5heh2yxnuk.wl%tiwai@suse.de>
 <20140220090938.GA2669@sirena.org.uk>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI 1.14.6 - "Maruoka")
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <alsa-devel-bounces@alsa-project.org>
Received: from mx2.suse.de (cantor2.suse.de [195.135.220.15])
 by alsa0.perex.cz (Postfix) with ESMTP id E69F72657A8
 for <alsa-devel@alsa-project.org>; Thu, 20 Feb 2014 15:56:11 +0100 (CET)
In-Reply-To: <20140220090938.GA2669@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, Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@gmail.com>
List-Id: alsa-devel@alsa-project.org

At Thu, 20 Feb 2014 18:09:38 +0900,
Mark Brown wrote:
> 
> On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 08:08:51AM +0100, Takashi Iwai wrote:
> > Mark Brown wrote:
> 
> > >  I'd also expect this to be more what the default naming does
> > > since we want to try to steer people towards using the simplest and
> > > least error prone mechanism for doing this.
> 
> > If changing the existing API is fine for you (not adding the new one),
> > it's trivial to convert the patches to do so.  Looking at the end
> 
> Yes, I think that's a better approach.  It's fairly obvious that the
> existing interface isn't awesome so it shouldn't be the default one.
> 
> > result, all SOC_ENUM_SINGLE() and SOC_ENUM_DOUBLE() usages are
> > covered.  For any specific usage in future, we may provide lowlevel
> > macros, __SOC_ENUM_SINGLE() with the number of items, too.
> 
> Indeed, I was intending to go through and look at renaming the legacy
> macros so they're implementaton details once I'd got through all the
> patches.

OK, but still a question is whether to split patches or not.
By splitting patches, we'll break the build in between, so the
bisection won't work well.  OTOH, a big single patch would be too
big.  I myself am inclined to have split patches despite bisection
breakage in this case.


Takashi