From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752518AbdK1Mqg (ORCPT ); Tue, 28 Nov 2017 07:46:36 -0500 Received: from mx2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:57213 "EHLO mx2.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752071AbdK1Mqe (ORCPT ); Tue, 28 Nov 2017 07:46:34 -0500 Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2017 13:46:32 +0100 Message-ID: From: Takashi Iwai To: SF Markus Elfring Cc: alsa-devel@alsa-project.org, Arvind Yadav , Jaroslav Kysela , Takashi Sakamoto , kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org, LKML Subject: Re: ALSA: nm256: Fine-tuning for three function implementations In-Reply-To: References: <24f8c777-1eb4-e7e7-9371-79f32700c9dc@users.sourceforge.net> <2cbef557-5f89-c630-e108-14ef2ce6b41a@users.sourceforge.net> <1547a4c2-5b70-e3a3-b482-d28c538e615c@users.sourceforge.net> User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 (Almost Unreal) SEMI/1.14.6 (Maruoka) FLIM/1.14.9 (=?UTF-8?B?R29qxY0=?=) APEL/10.8 Emacs/25.3 (x86_64-suse-linux-gnu) MULE/6.0 (HANACHIRUSATO) MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI 1.14.6 - "Maruoka") Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 28 Nov 2017 13:33:48 +0100, SF Markus Elfring wrote: > > >> It seems then that you can not get the kind of information you might be looking for > >> at the moment from me (alone). > > > > No, the patch itself speaks. > > Are we still trying to clarify (only) two possible update steps > for this software module? No. > > If you get more reviewed-by from others, it means already it's safer > > to apply. Then I can take it. > > How are the statistics for such tags in the sound subsystem? Just like other subsystems, with usual reviewed-by tags. > > But without that, it's obviously no material to take. > > Thanks for such an explanation of your current view. > > > >> I hope that mailing list readers could offer something. > > > > Let's hope. > > Are any additional communication interfaces helpful? No idea. > >> Did this software module become “too old”? > > > > Mostly the hardware is too old, > > Which time frames have you got in mind for acceptable software maintenance? It's not a question to me but to users. > > or the change itself isn't interesting enough. > > This is another general possibility. > > > >> Can higher level transformation patterns become easier to accept > >> by any other means? > > > > Only if it's assured to work and not to break anything else. > > Have you got any steps in mind for an improved “feeling” or “assurance”? Just do proper testing. Either on a real hardware or on a VM. > >> How much does the omission of such an useful development tool > >> influence your concerns? > > > > Can't judge unless I really see / use it. > > I find that there are some options to consider. > > >> Would you like to improve the software situation in any ways there? > > > > I *hope*, but only when it's not too annoying. > > Under which circumstances are you going to start working with a continuous > integration system? It's irrelevant, don't side-step. Takashi