On Mon, Aug 24, 2009 at 03:49:03PM +0300, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> > We should remember that arch/arm/plat-omap/mcbsp.c changes done via
> > ALSA tree has been an exception and that's only for simpler procedure.
> > McBSP is not so critical if sources goes out-of-sync but DMA is.
> Sorry for the de
* Jarkko Nikula [090824 08:47]:
> On Sun, 23 Aug 2009 19:49:43 +0100
> Mark Brown wrote:
>
> > On Sun, Aug 23, 2009 at 08:38:05PM +0200, Janusz Krzysztofik wrote:
> > > Sunday 23 August 2009 20:05:43 Mark Brown wrote:
> >
> > > > then what are the other
> > > > patches that depend on this? Nob
On Sun, 23 Aug 2009 19:49:43 +0100
Mark Brown wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 23, 2009 at 08:38:05PM +0200, Janusz Krzysztofik wrote:
> > Sunday 23 August 2009 20:05:43 Mark Brown wrote:
>
> > > then what are the other
> > > patches that depend on this? Nobody reported any issues in testing with
> > > th
On Sun, Aug 23, 2009 at 08:38:05PM +0200, Janusz Krzysztofik wrote:
> Sunday 23 August 2009 20:05:43 Mark Brown wrote:
> > then what are the other
> > patches that depend on this? Nobody reported any issues in testing with
> > the other OMAP patches.
> Dependency on patch 1/3 is not compile tim
Sunday 23 August 2009 20:05:43 Mark Brown wrote:
> If none of your patches have been applied
Mark,
I did not say that. You have applied patches 2/3 [1] and 3/3 [2] from the
series.
> then what are the other
> patches that depend on this? Nobody reported any issues in testing with
> the other
On Sun, Aug 23, 2009 at 07:45:39PM +0200, Janusz Krzysztofik wrote:
> If I missed something and my original patch has really been applied, I'll be
> happy to prepare a new version that reverts previos changes and makes those
> proposed in patch v2, if those are acceptable.
If none of your patch
Sunday 23 August 2009 19:03:59 Mark Brown wrote:
> It's not that it's not fair, at this point it's not possible - please
> make any changes you feel are required against current ASoC. The patch
> has been applied for a little while now and is buried quite deep in the
> already published history.
On Sun, Aug 23, 2009 at 05:56:12PM +0200, Janusz Krzysztofik wrote:
> I know it's not very fair to change the patch after others that depend on it
> have already been applied, but I hope there will be no problems with accepting
> the way I have reimplemented it. In any case, I'll appreciate any co
