On Sat, Aug 15, 2015 at 08:42:04PM +0530, Vinod Koul wrote:
On Sat, Aug 15, 2015 at 07:36:38AM -0700, Mark Brown wrote:
This is the sort of thing where the whole lack of documentation thing that I keep going on about becomes really important - there's a limited amount of time I can spend on any individual patch series and so things that need to be reverse engineered are just going to get queried a lot of the time (and even if they get reverse engineered the feedback is often going to be that the code needs to be clearer).
Okay, I did try to add comments to help understand but looks like I still have more work to do. Will try to add these details as well
If you're adding any of this stuff it's really not obvious, all I'm seeing is very tactical stuff down in the details of the code which isn't always useful without any big picture - bear in mind that there's a lot of Intel internal abstractions talking to Intel internal abstractions none of which are terribly obvious, and of course the tendency to throw in things like the NHLT table or acronyms like mcps.
Bigger changelogs would help a lot here, as would building the functionality up gradually rather than dumping large sections of code. Right now the changelogs just tend to be some fairly brief comments on the purpose of the code and don't really go into the structure or the design decisions that went into it.