[alsa-devel] [PATCH v1] ALSA: hda- Add headset mic pin quirk for a Dell device

[Woodrow Shen]

Hi Takashi and David,

Thanks your suggestions, i'll describe more details for this patch and send
it again.

Woodrow

On Fri, Jul 24, 2015 at 4:18 PM, Takashi Iwai <tiwai at suse.de> wrote:

> On Fri, 24 Jul 2015 10:03:22 +0200,
> David Henningsson wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > On 2015-07-24 09:50, Takashi Iwai wrote:
> > > On Fri, 24 Jul 2015 09:15:07 +0200,
> > > David Henningsson wrote:
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> On 2015-07-24 08:54, Takashi Iwai wrote:
> > >>> On Fri, 24 Jul 2015 06:50:42 +0200,
> > >>> woodrow.shen at canonical.com wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>> From: Woodrow Shen <woodrow.shen at canonical.com>
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Fix the headset mic that will not work on Dell desktop machine.
> > >>>> BugLink: https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1475553
> > >>>> Signed-off-by: Woodrow Shen <woodrow.shen at canonical.com>
> > >>>
> > >>> I have repeatedly received patches with the very same subject and
> with
> > >>> the very similar content but without further explanation.  It's too
> > >>> confusing.
> > >>>
> > >>> Please look through the git commit history of this file, and re-read
> > >>> your patch.  Then, consider a more useful subject / description, and
> > >>> resubmit the patch.
> > >>
> > >> Hi Takashi,
> > >>
> > >> We're doing enablement of machines and several of them need pin quirks
> > >> in order to have the headset mic working. Since these machines are
> > >> pre-release, we are not allowed to make the final name of the machine
> > >> public (e g, "Dell XPS 13"). For the same reason, we cannot give you
> > >> alsa-info either.
> > >>
> > >> Given this constraint, how do you suggest we improve the subject /
> > >> description? Or should we wait to submit upstream until the machine
> has
> > >> been released to the market?
> > >
> > > I don't mean to give alsa-info.sh output or such.  The problem is that
> > > it's always with the same subject and the same text.  How do you know
> > > it's for what and apply in which order?
> > >
> > > At least you should try the patch looks different with each other,
> > > describe the relationship with previous commits, etc.
> >
> > Right, so merely change the semantics, like "One more headset quirk",
> > "Yet another headset quirk", "a totally splendid headset quirk", "oh
> > look it's a headset quirk", "a headset quirk for a sunny day", and so on?
>
> Even that is better than the current form.  You can mention which
> patch is the second patch that should be applied after which commit.
> Or, you can give a bit more specific information like the codec name.
> And you can name the difference of pincfgs from others.  We need to
> know *why* this change is needed.
>
> > The relationship with previous commits is that they fix the same problem
> > for different machines, so they're usually independent of each other.
>
> But it is: you cannot apply the patch cleanly if you don't follow the
> order.
>
>
> thanks,
>
> Takashi
>



-- 
Regards,
Woodrow