On 2019-07-22 23:12, Pierre-Louis Bossart wrote:
On 7/20/19 2:45 PM, Cezary Rojewski wrote:
Existing IPC framework omits crucial part of the entire communication: reply header. Some IPCs cannot function at all without the access to said header. Update the sst-ipc with new sst_ipc_message structure to represent both request and reply allowing reply-processing handlers to save received responses.
Despite the range of changes required for model to be updated, no functional changes are made for core hanswell, baytrail and skylake message handlers. Reply-processing handlers now save received response header yet no usage is added by default.
To allow for future changes, righful kings of IPC kingdom need to be put back on the throne. This update addresses one of them: LARGE_CONFIG_GET.
Cezary Rojewski (5): ASoC: Intel: Update request-reply IPC model
I had a doubt on the structure of this patchset since you first change the structure definitions/prototypes and then use them in follow-up patches, and sure enough if I apply the first patch only the compilation is broken, see below.
The rule is that we can't break git bisect. And if you squash the patches together, then you have a really complicated patch to review/test, so like I said earlier such invasive changes in shared prototypes are really painful.
Thanks for your time and input, Pierre!
Agreed on the patchset structure. This wasn't a random mistake, though. Knew that meshing them all together immediately (v1) would be very hard for readers to review, despite the _simplicity_ of actual solution: explicit listing of message parts -> containment within sst_ipc_message.
I'll combine them together - except for the large_config_get one. Had these issues been addressed earlier, patches such as this wouldn't have been needed at all ;/
Czarek