[alsa-devel] [PATCH 0/6] ASoC: a few cleanups on sound/soc/fsl

Shawn Guo shawn.guo at linaro.org
Sat Feb 25 01:03:20 CET 2012

On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 05:14:12PM -0600, Timur Tabi wrote:
> Shawn Guo wrote:
> >> > That doesn't seem to be related to my point?  I'm asking you to not
> >> > reply to an old version of your patch series in order to post a new
> >> > version of it, just post the new version.
> > This is the first version of this series.
> I think there's a communication breakdown.  Shawn, take a look at this:
> http://mailman.alsa-project.org/pipermail/alsa-devel/2012-February/thread.html
> Search for "[alsa-devel] [PATCH 0/6] ASoC: a few cleanups on sound/soc/fsl".
> You'll see that this email is indented, because it was posted to the
> mailing list AS A REPLY to "[alsa-devel] [PATCH 1/4] ASoC: imx: let
> SND_MXC_SOC_FIQ select FIQ".  That's because it has this line in the
> message header:
> In-Reply-To: <1329979644-31046-1-git-send-email-shawn.guo at linaro.org>
> This is what Mark is talking about.  He wants new patch sets to be posted
> NOT as replies to other patch sets.
Yes, I did something wrong.  But my point is the following patches
should belong to one big series.  They can not be applied separately.

[PATCH 1/4] ASoC: imx: let SND_MXC_SOC_FIQ select FIQ
[PATCH 2/4] ASoC: imx: move SND_SOC_AC97_BUS selection down to machine driver
[PATCH 3/4] ASoC: imx: initialize dma_params burstsize just in imx-ssi
[PATCH 4/4] ASoC: imx: separate imx-pcm bits from imx-ssi driver
[PATCH 0/4] ASoC: merge imx into fsl
[PATCH 0/6] ASoC: a few cleanups on sound/soc/fsl


More information about the Alsa-devel mailing list