[alsa-devel] [PATCH] ASoC: bcm: Remove obsoleted Kconfig dependency
CONFIG_SND_SOC_DMAENGINE_PCM was renamed to CONFIG_SND_DMAENGINE_PCM recently. And yet we don't have to select it since CONFIG_SND_GENERIC_DMAENGINE_PCM selects the dependency by itself, so just rip it off.
Signed-off-by: Takashi Iwai tiwai@suse.de --- sound/soc/bcm/Kconfig | 1 - 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/sound/soc/bcm/Kconfig b/sound/soc/bcm/Kconfig index 3d82a29ce3a8..6a834e109f1d 100644 --- a/sound/soc/bcm/Kconfig +++ b/sound/soc/bcm/Kconfig @@ -1,7 +1,6 @@ config SND_BCM2835_SOC_I2S tristate "SoC Audio support for the Broadcom BCM2835 I2S module" depends on ARCH_BCM2835 || COMPILE_TEST - select SND_SOC_DMAENGINE_PCM select SND_SOC_GENERIC_DMAENGINE_PCM select REGMAP_MMIO help
Oh I forgot about removing that, thanks!
Acked-by: Florian Meier florian.meier@koalo.de
On 01/08/2014 10:37 AM, Takashi Iwai wrote:
CONFIG_SND_SOC_DMAENGINE_PCM was renamed to CONFIG_SND_DMAENGINE_PCM recently. And yet we don't have to select it since CONFIG_SND_GENERIC_DMAENGINE_PCM selects the dependency by itself, so just rip it off.
Signed-off-by: Takashi Iwai tiwai@suse.de
sound/soc/bcm/Kconfig | 1 - 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/sound/soc/bcm/Kconfig b/sound/soc/bcm/Kconfig index 3d82a29ce3a8..6a834e109f1d 100644 --- a/sound/soc/bcm/Kconfig +++ b/sound/soc/bcm/Kconfig @@ -1,7 +1,6 @@ config SND_BCM2835_SOC_I2S tristate "SoC Audio support for the Broadcom BCM2835 I2S module" depends on ARCH_BCM2835 || COMPILE_TEST
- select SND_SOC_DMAENGINE_PCM select SND_SOC_GENERIC_DMAENGINE_PCM select REGMAP_MMIO help
On Wed, Jan 08, 2014 at 10:37:07AM +0100, Takashi Iwai wrote:
CONFIG_SND_SOC_DMAENGINE_PCM was renamed to CONFIG_SND_DMAENGINE_PCM recently. And yet we don't have to select it since CONFIG_SND_GENERIC_DMAENGINE_PCM selects the dependency by itself, so just rip it off.
Applied, but please CC maintainers...
At Wed, 8 Jan 2014 19:59:47 +0000, Mark Brown wrote:
On Wed, Jan 08, 2014 at 10:37:07AM +0100, Takashi Iwai wrote:
CONFIG_SND_SOC_DMAENGINE_PCM was renamed to CONFIG_SND_DMAENGINE_PCM recently. And yet we don't have to select it since CONFIG_SND_GENERIC_DMAENGINE_PCM selects the dependency by itself, so just rip it off.
Applied, but please CC maintainers...
The patch was sent _to_ you. This means usually a higher priority than Cc :)
Maybe @linaro.org wasn't good for you? It was the address deduced from get_maintainers.pl.
Takashi
On Wed, Jan 08, 2014 at 09:08:14PM +0100, Takashi Iwai wrote:
Maybe @linaro.org wasn't good for you? It was the address deduced from get_maintainers.pl.
get_maintainers *should* also tell you to use @kernel.org, that's what's actually in MAINTAINERS (which should be preferred over git history, or both used) which is where I actually read upstream mail.
At Wed, 8 Jan 2014 20:17:09 +0000, Mark Brown wrote:
On Wed, Jan 08, 2014 at 09:08:14PM +0100, Takashi Iwai wrote:
Maybe @linaro.org wasn't good for you? It was the address deduced from get_maintainers.pl.
get_maintainers *should* also tell you to use @kernel.org, that's what's actually in MAINTAINERS (which should be preferred over git history, or both used) which is where I actually read upstream mail.
Then the problem is that you committed and signed off with linaro.org address in git. If you don't want receive any patches at this address, you should never use it for git. As a Netiquette, one shouldn't post a mail to multiple addresses if it's known for the same person.
Takashi
On Thu, Jan 09, 2014 at 07:29:01AM +0100, Takashi Iwai wrote:
Mark Brown wrote:
get_maintainers *should* also tell you to use @kernel.org, that's what's actually in MAINTAINERS (which should be preferred over git history, or both used) which is where I actually read upstream mail.
Then the problem is that you committed and signed off with linaro.org address in git. If you don't want receive any patches at this
It's getting more common these days, companies want their address to end up in git but it's not so good for upstream mail for whatever reason (historically a lot of it has been Exchange related, though that's not the case for me). It's more noticable for people applying patches than for people sending them.
address, you should never use it for git. As a Netiquette, one shouldn't post a mail to multiple addresses if it's known for the same person.
Sure, but if you're going to use one I'd expect the MAINTAINERS address to win - I did have someone the other day using my Wolfson address still since they were going off signoffs and the thing they were working on wasn't that actively developed.
At Thu, 9 Jan 2014 10:32:01 +0000, Mark Brown wrote:
On Thu, Jan 09, 2014 at 07:29:01AM +0100, Takashi Iwai wrote:
Mark Brown wrote:
get_maintainers *should* also tell you to use @kernel.org, that's what's actually in MAINTAINERS (which should be preferred over git history, or both used) which is where I actually read upstream mail.
Then the problem is that you committed and signed off with linaro.org address in git. If you don't want receive any patches at this
It's getting more common these days, companies want their address to end up in git but it's not so good for upstream mail for whatever reason (historically a lot of it has been Exchange related, though that's not the case for me). It's more noticable for people applying patches than for people sending them.
There is no general rule that MAINTAINERS address wins over others. Many developers use other addresses primarily than the old address on MAINTAINERS file. Your case is rather rare, I'd say.
address, you should never use it for git. As a Netiquette, one shouldn't post a mail to multiple addresses if it's known for the same person.
Sure, but if you're going to use one I'd expect the MAINTAINERS address to win - I did have someone the other day using my Wolfson address still since they were going off signoffs and the thing they were working on wasn't that actively developed.
MAINTAINERS file isn't always updated frequently enough, too. So, at best, one would compare the time the address was used and decide which address has a higher chance to reach.
Takashi
On Thu, Jan 09, 2014 at 12:00:07PM +0100, Takashi Iwai wrote:
Mark Brown wrote:
It's getting more common these days, companies want their address to end up in git but it's not so good for upstream mail for whatever reason (historically a lot of it has been Exchange related, though that's not the case for me). It's more noticable for people applying patches than for people sending them.
There is no general rule that MAINTAINERS address wins over others. Many developers use other addresses primarily than the old address on MAINTAINERS file. Your case is rather rare, I'd say.
It seems the wider use get_maintianer.pl has changed that - people seem more dilligent about updating their addresses now (especially if the one that's there is a problem). I do also have to say that this complaint typically also comes along with people not CCing Liam which tends to suggest that they didn't consult MAINTAINERS at all.
Sure, but if you're going to use one I'd expect the MAINTAINERS address to win - I did have someone the other day using my Wolfson address still since they were going off signoffs and the thing they were working on wasn't that actively developed.
MAINTAINERS file isn't always updated frequently enough, too. So, at best, one would compare the time the address was used and decide which address has a higher chance to reach.
Well, in my case it's very rare that a mail from my linaro.org address goes upstream...
participants (3)
-
Florian Meier -
Mark Brown -
Takashi Iwai