Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Fri, 12 Jun 2020 21:07:24 +0530
From:   Vaibhav Agarwal <vaibhav.sr@gmail.com>
To:     Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
Cc:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        Alex Elder <elder@kernel.org>, Johan Hovold <johan@kernel.org>,
        Mark Greer <mgreer@animalcreek.com>,
        Takashi Iwai <tiwai@suse.com>,
        Jaroslav Kysela <perex@perex.cz>,
        Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@gmail.com>,
        greybus-dev@lists.linaro.org, devel@driverdev.osuosl.org,
        alsa-devel@alsa-project.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/6] Enable Greybus Audio codec driver
Message-ID: <20200612153722.GB26807@gmail.com>
References: <cover.1591802243.git.vaibhav.sr@gmail.com>
 <20200610173711.GK5005@sirena.org.uk>
 <20200610182322.GC21465@gmail.com>
 <20200611082616.GA4671@sirena.org.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20200611082616.GA4671@sirena.org.uk>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1+3 (f9293d646485) (2018-09-22)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Jun 11, 2020 at 09:26:16AM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 10, 2020 at 11:53:24PM +0530, Vaibhav Agarwal wrote:
> 
> > With patch#6 in this series, I'm proposing some of the (dummy) helper 
> > APIs required to link DAPM DAI widgets for the GB Audio modules 
> > added/removed dynamically.
> 
> > Eventually, I would like to propose relevant changes in snd-soc APIs to 
> > enable dynamic linking of DAI widgets for the modules added and 
> > remove/free component controls for the module removed.
> 
> > I'm seeking your opinion on the proposed changes. And as per the 
> > recommendation I'm sharing the changes with ASoC mailing list as well.
> 
> These are proposed incremental changes to an out of tree driver that has
> never been submitted.  I don't know what the current code looks like,
> what it's supposed to be doing or anything like that so I've no idea
> what's going on or why.
> 
> > Kindly suggest me the preferred way to follow on this thread. 
> 
> This is effectively out of tree code, until someone submits it properly
> I'm not sure it's useful to submit incremental patches upstream.

Thanks for the suggestion Mark. I'll create a separate patchset aligned 
to the ASoC tree in next ~2 weeks and share them separately.

Hi Greg,

Do you think the current patchset can be considered for the purpose of 
resolving componentization issue raised by Alexandre?

--
Regards,
Vaibhav