Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Tue, 8 Jan 2002 05:13:23 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Tue, 8 Jan 2002 05:13:13 -0500 Received: from ns.suse.de ([213.95.15.193]:27914 "HELO Cantor.suse.de") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id ; Tue, 8 Jan 2002 05:12:58 -0500 Date: Tue, 08 Jan 2002 11:12:56 +0100 Message-ID: From: Takashi Iwai To: Abramo Bagnara Cc: Linus Torvalds , Jaroslav Kysela , "J.A. Magallon" , Alan Cox , Alan Cox , Christoph Hellwig , sound-hackers@zabbo.net, linux-sound@vger.rutgers.edu, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [s-h] Re: ALSA patch for 2.5.2pre9 kernel In-Reply-To: <3C3AC150.BE4FFAFE@alsa-project.org> In-Reply-To: <20020108102833.A2927@werewolf.able.es> <20020108103046.A3545@werewolf.able.es> <3C3AC150.BE4FFAFE@alsa-project.org> User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.6.0 (Twist And Shout) SEMI/1.14.3 (Ushinoya) FLIM/1.14.3 (=?ISO-8859-4?Q?Unebigory=F2mae?=) APEL/10.2 MULE XEmacs/21.4 (patch 4) (Artificial Intelligence) (i386-suse-linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI 1.14.3 - "Ushinoya") Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org At Tue, 08 Jan 2002 10:52:16 +0100, Abramo wrote: > > "J.A. Magallon" wrote: > > > > On 20020108 Linus Torvalds wrote: > > > > > >On Mon, 7 Jan 2002, Alan Cox wrote: > > >> > Would't it be better to split drivers: > > >> > > > >> > sound/core.c > > >> > sound/alsa/alsa-core.c > > >> > sound/alsa/drivers/alsa-emu10k.c > > >> > sound/oss/oss-core.c > > >> > sound/oss/drivers/oss-emu10k.c > > >> > > >> Thats much harder to do randomg greps on and to find stuff,than drivers > > >> first > > > > > >I agree. Put drivers separately, let's not split it up more than that. > > > > > > > What would you do with drivers with the same name (source code file) > > in alsa and oss ? > > Sound is special because you have two implementations of the same subsystem > > living together. And eventually in a (near?) future, the oss subtree > > will be killed and the alsa one would go up one level, just as is. Much > > cleaner. And you will end with > > > > sound/alsa-core.c > > sound/drivers/alsa-driver.c > > I think it's better to face this big change once and to move the OSS > stuff now in its definitive place (where it might be removed in future). > > So we'd have: > sound/ > sound/oss_native > sound/oss_emul > sound/synth > sound/include > drivers/sound/i2c > drivers/sound/isa > drivers/sound/pci > drivers/sound/ppc On the list above, to where OSS (hw specific) codes come? Into a single directory, sound/oss_native? Or both ALSA and OSS drivers are mixed into drivers/sound/*? I'd like to see ALSA and OSS codes are separated into different directories... Otherwise it's too confusing. And how about drivers/sound/generic for generic hardware codes such as ac97_codec.c? > I still have some doubts about hardware specific include files: > a) sound/include > b) drivers/sound/{i2c,isa,pci,ppc} > c) drivers/sound/include > > Currently my vote would go for b), but I see drawbacks for this solution > (for generic chip include files, like ac97 or ak4531 ones). Perhaps it's > better to have a mixed solution (partly b) and partly c) Agreed. The hw specific header files should be bound with *.c code together. Takashi - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/