[alsa-devel] snd-usb: endpoint code rework
With major parts of code shuffling out of the way, it might get clear where the actual rework of the endpoint code goes. I've attached my local diff (basically the same code base as some weeks ago) for an review of the rough idea.
Thanks, Daniel
At Wed, 14 Sep 2011 15:54:41 +0200, Daniel Mack wrote:
With major parts of code shuffling out of the way, it might get clear where the actual rework of the endpoint code goes. I've attached my local diff (basically the same code base as some weeks ago) for an review of the rough idea.
Maybe git-diff -b would be a bit easier to look in such a case. It's no patch to be applied, so the whitespace changes are uninteresting.
thanks,
Takashi
On Fri, Sep 16, 2011 at 8:28 AM, Takashi Iwai tiwai@suse.de wrote:
At Wed, 14 Sep 2011 15:54:41 +0200, Daniel Mack wrote:
With major parts of code shuffling out of the way, it might get clear where the actual rework of the endpoint code goes. I've attached my local diff (basically the same code base as some weeks ago) for an review of the rough idea.
Maybe git-diff -b would be a bit easier to look in such a case. It's no patch to be applied, so the whitespace changes are uninteresting.
Actually, it was created with "-B -b". Anyway - you could apply it locally and tweak your "git diff" :)
At Fri, 16 Sep 2011 09:07:18 +0200, Daniel Mack wrote:
On Fri, Sep 16, 2011 at 8:28 AM, Takashi Iwai tiwai@suse.de wrote:
At Wed, 14 Sep 2011 15:54:41 +0200, Daniel Mack wrote:
With major parts of code shuffling out of the way, it might get clear where the actual rework of the endpoint code goes. I've attached my local diff (basically the same code base as some weeks ago) for an review of the rough idea.
Maybe git-diff -b would be a bit easier to look in such a case. It's no patch to be applied, so the whitespace changes are uninteresting.
Actually, it was created with "-B -b".
It seems better without -B in this case.
Takashi
participants (2)
-
Daniel Mack -
Takashi Iwai