@Pierre-Louis
That looks acceptable to me, Xiuli can you test with with the matching change in the SOF topology macros (we can keep the 'slave' in M4 files but expand to 'codec_slave' in the .conf to avoid making this exception visible).
I don't see any comments from Pan Xiuli in the whole mailing thread. Do we still wait for his feedback?
@Mark
Should we warn on use of "master" since it's being deprecated here (and might be confusing for users)?
Maybe. OTOH, it looks fully backward-compatible, so far, so it's not that confusing yet.
Not a compatibility issue, yeah - more just that we've clearly already got people confused so pushing people to the more explicit name might avoid further issues down the line.
Agree with that. I will add a warning and send it as a patch v2.
@Takashi
Yep, please at the next time. (And, don't stick with an old thread, but refresh a new thread.)
Yes, I will do so. I want to do this clean, so let me clarify before I start:
1. I will start a new thread, with linux [patch v2] 2. I will send the [patch, alsa-lib v2] in-reply to that linux [patch v2] 3. I will add all currently involved people as CC
Does it look correct?
Best Regards, Kirill