From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756427AbcEETqO (ORCPT ); Thu, 5 May 2016 15:46:14 -0400 Received: from smtp03.smtpout.orange.fr ([80.12.242.125]:55318 "EHLO smtp.smtpout.orange.fr" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755648AbcEETqN (ORCPT ); Thu, 5 May 2016 15:46:13 -0400 X-ME-Helo: belgarion X-ME-Auth: amFyem1pay5yb2JlcnRAb3JhbmdlLmZy X-ME-Date: Thu, 05 May 2016 21:46:11 +0200 X-ME-IP: 86.199.197.141 From: Robert Jarzmik To: Mark Brown Cc: Daniel Mack , Haojian Zhuang , Jaroslav Kysela , Takashi Iwai , Liam Girdwood , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, alsa-devel@alsa-project.org, patches@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/7] ALSA: ac97: split out the generic ac97 registers References: <1462050939-27940-1-git-send-email-robert.jarzmik@free.fr> <1462050939-27940-2-git-send-email-robert.jarzmik@free.fr> <20160503115159.GP6292@sirena.org.uk> <87y47roski.fsf@belgarion.home> <20160504090702.GV6292@sirena.org.uk> <87pot0pbnf.fsf@belgarion.home> <20160505191728.GK6292@sirena.org.uk> X-URL: http://belgarath.falguerolles.org/ Date: Thu, 05 May 2016 21:46:10 +0200 In-Reply-To: <20160505191728.GK6292@sirena.org.uk> (Mark Brown's message of "Thu, 5 May 2016 20:17:28 +0100") Message-ID: <87h9ecp9tp.fsf@belgarion.home> User-Agent: Gnus/5.130008 (Ma Gnus v0.8) Emacs/24.4 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Mark Brown writes: > On Thu, May 05, 2016 at 09:06:44PM +0200, Robert Jarzmik wrote: >> Mark Brown writes: > >> > I see that, I just don't know why that helps. >> In order to have a clean split between former ac97 bus implementation and this >> new one, I didn't want to include any former ac97 includes, excepting in >> sound/ac97/compat.c. > > It's probably a good idea to articulate some of this in the commit log > then! Fair point, I'll improve that. >> This transition will be easier if the new ac97 code is isolated as much as >> possible from the former code while providing backward compatibility ... hence >> this patch. > > It'd probably have been clearer to me if it were splitting out all the > register definitions rather than just some of them. Euh unless I'm missing something I have splitted out all the ac97 generic registers AFAIK. The only remaining ones are chip specific which I didn't take as they should be in codec specific code and not ac97 generic one. Cheers. -- Robert