[RFC PATCH 1/3] topology: use inclusive language for bclk

[Mark Brown]

On Tue, Sep 08, 2020 at 09:41:34AM -0500, Pierre-Louis Bossart wrote:
> On 9/8/20 9:35 AM, Mark Brown wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 08, 2020 at 08:39:13AM -0500, Pierre-Louis Bossart wrote:

> > > It's absolutely 100% compatible by design.
> > > I was planning to update the kernel uapi header to align changes, but the
> > > volume of code is much lower on the alsa-lib side. Will resubmit with the
> > > preferred provider/consumer wording.

> > It's binary compatible but it'd break the build for any existing code
> > using the UAPI headers.

> Sorry, I don't fully get the comment. Aren't the uapi headers copied into
> each software tree that relies on them?

Yes, it's just a question of how disruptive an update ends up being for
people - if hardly anyone is using it and they know about the change it
probably doesn't matter that much.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 488 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.alsa-project.org/pipermail/alsa-devel/attachments/20200908/fd66c9b7/attachment.sig>