From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757041AbcBCIvd (ORCPT ); Wed, 3 Feb 2016 03:51:33 -0500 Received: from mail-wm0-f54.google.com ([74.125.82.54]:33503 "EHLO mail-wm0-f54.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756816AbcBCIsc (ORCPT ); Wed, 3 Feb 2016 03:48:32 -0500 Subject: Re: [alsa-devel] [PATCH RFC 03/15] ASoC: qcom: rename rdmactl_audif_start to dmactrl_audif_start To: Patrick Lai , alsa-devel@alsa-project.org, Banajit Goswami , Liam Girdwood , linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Takashi Iwai , Mark Brown References: <1454347622-9970-1-git-send-email-srinivas.kandagatla@linaro.org> <1454347708-10446-1-git-send-email-srinivas.kandagatla@linaro.org> <20160203003547.GD14436@kwestfie-linux.qualcomm.com> From: Srinivas Kandagatla Message-ID: <56B1BEDD.1010000@linaro.org> Date: Wed, 3 Feb 2016 08:48:29 +0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.5.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20160203003547.GD14436@kwestfie-linux.qualcomm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 03/02/16 00:35, Kenneth Westfield wrote: > On Mon, Feb 01, 2016 at 09:28:28AM -0800, Srinivas Kandagatla wrote: >> diff --git a/sound/soc/qcom/lpass-platform.c >> b/sound/soc/qcom/lpass-platform.c >> index a6dce1b..bfc9de6 100644 >> --- a/sound/soc/qcom/lpass-platform.c >> +++ b/sound/soc/qcom/lpass-platform.c >> @@ -91,7 +91,7 @@ static int lpass_platform_pcmops_hw_params(struct >> snd_pcm_substream *substream, >> unsigned int channels = params_channels(params); >> unsigned int regval; >> int bitwidth; >> - int ret, rdma_port = pcm_data->i2s_port + v->rdmactl_audif_start; >> + int ret, rdma_port = pcm_data->i2s_port + v->dmactl_audif_start; > > I was wondering why rdma_port had not been changed as well, until I saw > that in a later patch. Would it make sense to combine all changes > related to removing read-only indications from identifiers to one patch? Yep, I will see if I can merge this and also I need to fix the ordering, I got same report from 0day testing too. >