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 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D3F5BC4363D for ; Sat, 3 Oct 2020 09:12:51 +0000 (UTC) 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 mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EA8FE206DB for ; Sat, 3 Oct 2020 09:12:50 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=alsa-project.org header.i=@alsa-project.org header.b="W/7kZvAd"; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="WOckEZjg" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org EA8FE206DB Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=linuxfoundation.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=alsa-devel-bounces@alsa-project.org Received: from alsa1.perex.cz (alsa1.perex.cz [207.180.221.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by alsa0.perex.cz (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4C6D318F8; Sat, 3 Oct 2020 11:11:58 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 alsa0.perex.cz 4C6D318F8 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=alsa-project.org; s=default; t=1601716368; bh=EZshOeLqmqihhxKF8S39aQPGlurmcvNz3LVBPzyLhcM=; h=Date:From:To:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:Cc:List-Id: List-Unsubscribe:List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help:List-Subscribe: From; b=W/7kZvAdOYcvhdn4HOfNotCneLgQpbaPC4dKVoxBu/GJT6d0as06makwdaAOKOp5w DiZ2z8W4XirEVX4D0qeHkRWa9u/Xf/O9ZSF2KisvKJHkhX4iNk3wFp52pS12R0xx59 TYO3Jwiq52phhidYEiGRUBYru5G5no7qobZdD0HI= Received: from alsa1.perex.cz (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by alsa1.perex.cz (Postfix) with ESMTP id BE52DF800BB; Sat, 3 Oct 2020 11:10:09 +0200 (CEST) Received: by alsa1.perex.cz (Postfix, from userid 50401) id D9B66F80271; Sat, 3 Oct 2020 11:10:07 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by alsa1.perex.cz (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9736DF800BB for ; Sat, 3 Oct 2020 11:09:56 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 alsa1.perex.cz 9736DF800BB Authentication-Results: alsa1.perex.cz; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="WOckEZjg" Received: from localhost (83-86-74-64.cable.dynamic.v4.ziggo.nl [83.86.74.64]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 7B64D206CA; Sat, 3 Oct 2020 09:09:54 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1601716195; bh=EZshOeLqmqihhxKF8S39aQPGlurmcvNz3LVBPzyLhcM=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=WOckEZjgX4V10651gaed+Xyuk8am38ozgg8IrXdrNtP6tli5pmoW9tYi4cBgpOA1K fVLC2WSpp87G6Ip71k+Lu6ukVxsgAKGNyKOZ4SUMvTGCXjQdZn4pIsktp5Ny7VzJqW CZvLPOWzqRHf8njzKvFmkEOIVk/3qKfcryYkXgE4= Date: Sat, 3 Oct 2020 11:09:51 +0200 From: Greg KH To: "Ertman, David M" Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/6] Ancillary bus implementation and SOF multi-client support Message-ID: <20201003090951.GE114893@kroah.com> References: <20200930225051.889607-1-david.m.ertman@intel.com> <20201001071403.GC31191@kroah.com> <20201003090855.GD114893@kroah.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20201003090855.GD114893@kroah.com> Cc: "alsa-devel@alsa-project.org" , "tiwai@suse.de" , "Sridharan, Ranjani" , "pierre-louis.bossart@linux.intel.com" , "broonie@kernel.org" , "parav@nvidia.com" , "jgg@nvidia.com" X-BeenThere: alsa-devel@alsa-project.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: "Alsa-devel mailing list for ALSA developers - http://www.alsa-project.org" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: alsa-devel-bounces@alsa-project.org Sender: "Alsa-devel" On Sat, Oct 03, 2020 at 11:08:55AM +0200, Greg KH wrote: > On Fri, Oct 02, 2020 at 08:23:49PM +0000, Ertman, David M wrote: > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Greg KH > > > Sent: Thursday, October 1, 2020 12:14 AM > > > To: Ertman, David M > > > Cc: alsa-devel@alsa-project.org; tiwai@suse.de; broonie@kernel.org; pierre- > > > louis.bossart@linux.intel.com; Sridharan, Ranjani > > > ; jgg@nvidia.com; parav@nvidia.com > > > Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/6] Ancillary bus implementation and SOF multi-client > > > support > > > > > > On Wed, Sep 30, 2020 at 03:50:45PM -0700, Dave Ertman wrote: > > > > The ancillary bus (then known as virtual bus) was originally submitted > > > > along with implementation code for the ice driver and irdma drive, > > > > causing the complication of also having dependencies in the rdma tree. > > > > This new submission is utilizing an ancillary bus consumer in only the > > > > sound driver tree to create the initial implementation and a single > > > > user. > > > > > > So this will not work for the ice driver and/or irdma drivers? It would > > > be great to see how they work for this as well as getting those > > > maintainers to review and sign off on this implementation as well. > > > Don't ignore those developers, that's a bit "odd", don't you think? > > > > > > To drop them from the review process is actually kind of rude, what > > > happens if this gets merged without their input? > > > > > > And the name, why was it changed and what does it mean? For non-native > > > english speakers this is going to be rough, given that I as a native > > > english speaker had to go look up the word in a dictionary to fully > > > understand what you are trying to do with that name. > > > > Through our internal review process, objections were raised on naming the > > new bus virtual bus. The main objection was that virtual bus was too close to virtio, > > virtchnl, etc., that /sys/bus/virtual would be confused with /sys/bus/virtio, and > > there is just a lot of 'virt' stuff in the kernel already. > > We already have a virtual bus/location in the driver model today, has > that confused anyone? I see this as an extension of that logic and > ideally, those users will be moved over to this interface over time as > well. > > > Several names were suggested (like peer bus, which was shot down because in > > parts on the English speaking world the peerage means nobility), finally > > "ancillary bus" was arrived at by consensus of not hating it. > > "not hating it", while sometimes is a good thing, for something that I > am going to have to tell everyone to go use, I would like to at least > "like it". And right now I don't like it... > > I think we should go back to "virtual" for now, or, if the people who > didn't like it on your "internal" reviews wish to participate here and > defend their choice, I would be glad to listen to that reasoning. Also, the fact that we are even talking about a core kernel function on only the alsa-devel list is pretty horrible. I'm just going to drop this whole thread and wait until you can submit it properly before responding anymore on it. greg k-h