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=-0.8 required=3.0 tests=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 AD319C10F14 for ; Fri, 11 Oct 2019 01:08:20 +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 AC24620B7C for ; Fri, 11 Oct 2019 01:08:19 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=alsa-project.org header.i=@alsa-project.org header.b="L1drVegB" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org AC24620B7C Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=renesas.com 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 688EE1614; Fri, 11 Oct 2019 03:07:27 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 alsa0.perex.cz 688EE1614 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=alsa-project.org; s=default; t=1570756097; bh=o5u63mvPDAGHr1aOYN5Tbn7yV97eIXKhUKu7a3XNdQc=; h=Date:From:To:In-Reply-To:References:Cc:Subject:List-Id: List-Unsubscribe:List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help:List-Subscribe: From; b=L1drVegB7eljxcbk4WQjuMCwG6s+OZEN99/bI2dBTmjQqcZfvb1rk3aVY+xJ+nua6 KGCDeYgBWd//ug8x6EZ/Xr3/vk0NvXExqJYT3KNfCWLgej8a7FLe3ks+TZ4ihMfbDv EGJBrYk8LwwxnMVmpF9VU/QD1yH/vXpTEEkDukvU= Received: from alsa1.perex.cz (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by alsa1.perex.cz (Postfix) with ESMTP id DD83CF80322; Fri, 11 Oct 2019 03:07:26 +0200 (CEST) Received: by alsa1.perex.cz (Postfix, from userid 50401) id C1E4CF8038F; Fri, 11 Oct 2019 03:07:25 +0200 (CEST) Received: from relmlie6.idc.renesas.com (relmlor2.renesas.com [210.160.252.172]) by alsa1.perex.cz (Postfix) with ESMTP id B5CDFF80113 for ; Fri, 11 Oct 2019 03:07:17 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 alsa1.perex.cz B5CDFF80113 Date: 11 Oct 2019 10:07:14 +0900 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.67,281,1566831600"; d="scan'208";a="28606541" Received: from unknown (HELO relmlir5.idc.renesas.com) ([10.200.68.151]) by relmlie6.idc.renesas.com with ESMTP; 11 Oct 2019 10:07:14 +0900 Received: from morimoto-PC.renesas.com (unknown [10.166.18.140]) by relmlir5.idc.renesas.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 98E67400F93B; Fri, 11 Oct 2019 10:07:14 +0900 (JST) Message-ID: <87sgo0w0n1.wl-kuninori.morimoto.gx@renesas.com> From: Kuninori Morimoto To: Pierre-Louis Bossart In-Reply-To: References: <87sgo2ilso.wl-kuninori.morimoto.gx@renesas.com> <878spuilqd.wl-kuninori.morimoto.gx@renesas.com> User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 Emacs/24.5 Mule/6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI-EPG 1.14.7 - "Harue") Cc: Linux-ALSA , Mark Brown Subject: Re: [alsa-devel] [PATCH 14/21] ASoC: soc-core: have legacy_dai_naming at snd_soc_register_dai() 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: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: alsa-devel-bounces@alsa-project.org Sender: "Alsa-devel" Hi Pierre-Louis Thank you for your feedback > > snd_soc_register_dai() is now used from topology. > > But, to reduce duplicated code, it will be used from soc-core, too. > > To prepare for it, this patch adds missing parameter legacy_dai_naming > > to snd_soc_register_dai(). > > It doesn't look like this series reduces the confusion between > snd_soc_register_dai() and snd_soc_register_dais() ? > > maybe for the latter case since it's a static function we don't want > the entire prefix then? Maybe my explain is not so good... The point is that, in general people think like below from naming. Other functions are this style. => int snd_soc_register_dai() { ... } int snd_soc_register_dais() { for(..) { => snd_soc_register_dai() } } But in reality is like this int snd_soc_register_dai() { /* almost same but different code */ } snd_soc_register_dais() { /* almost same but different code */ } To avoid duplicate code and confusion, this patchset try to implement "general" style. But needs some preparation. I will fix log and English. Thank you for your help !! Best regards --- Kuninori Morimoto _______________________________________________ Alsa-devel mailing list Alsa-devel@alsa-project.org https://mailman.alsa-project.org/mailman/listinfo/alsa-devel