On Fri, Feb 6, 2015 at 11:23 AM, Takashi Iwai tiwai@suse.de wrote:
At Fri, 06 Feb 2015 16:04:42 +0100, Takashi Iwai wrote:
At Fri, 6 Feb 2015 08:51:11 -0600, Chris Rorvick wrote:
Provide a descriptive name for each driver instead of calling all of them "line6usb".
This needs to be done carefully. This string is referred in alsa-lib to pick up the the configuration file. So, this change shall break the compatibility.
If we ever want to pick up a different alsa-lib configuration depending on each line6 driver type, then yes, we should give the individual driver name. If we want to keep rather the common configuration file (so far there is none, but if any in furture), then we should keep the common driver name.
And, the decision must be done now. From now on, basically we are not allowed to break the user-space compatibility. That is, this is the very last chance to do it.
If your patch is supposed to do it with these consideration, I'm willing to take. But, I guess it's not, because you chose the string like "Line 6 POD". This is usually not ideal as a driver name; think of $DRIVER.conf file that is used for alsa-lib configuration.
So, from that POV, "line6usb" is no bad name string. If we want differentiate per driver, a name like "Line6-Pod" or just "Pod" would be more appropriate.
Just to make sure: I'm not against giving own driver name for each line6 driver. I myself think it'd be rather better than the single common name for long term. But, the name string should be more usable as a file name, i.e. without space and just two words or so.
OK, thanks for clarifying. I did not realize this was used to look for a config file name. I will resubmit using the /Line6-\w+/ convention.
Regards,
Chris