Re: [PATCH v2 6/6] ASOC: Unify code style for platform_device_id arrays

[Uwe Kleine-König (The Capable Hub)]

Hello Cezary,

On Wed, Jul 22, 2026 at 07:55:26PM +0200, Cezary Rojewski wrote:
> On 7/20/2026 8:23 AM, Uwe Kleine-König (The Capable Hub) wrote:
> 
> >   sound/soc/au1x/db1200.c                |  2 +-
> >   sound/soc/codecs/adau7118-hw.c         |  2 +-
> >   sound/soc/codecs/bt-sco.c              | 10 +++-------
> >   sound/soc/codecs/wcd934x.c             |  6 ++----
> >   sound/soc/fsl/imx-pcm-rpmsg.c          |  6 +++---
> >   sound/soc/intel/avs/boards/da7219.c    |  6 ++----
> >   sound/soc/intel/avs/boards/dmic.c      |  6 ++----
> >   sound/soc/intel/avs/boards/es8336.c    |  6 ++----
> >   sound/soc/intel/avs/boards/hdaudio.c   |  6 ++----
> >   sound/soc/intel/avs/boards/i2s_test.c  |  6 ++----
> >   sound/soc/intel/avs/boards/max98357a.c |  6 ++----
> >   sound/soc/intel/avs/boards/max98373.c  |  6 ++----
> >   sound/soc/intel/avs/boards/max98927.c  |  6 ++----
> >   sound/soc/intel/avs/boards/nau8825.c   |  6 ++----
> >   sound/soc/intel/avs/boards/pcm3168a.c  |  6 ++----
> >   sound/soc/intel/avs/boards/probe.c     |  2 +-
> >   sound/soc/intel/avs/boards/rt274.c     |  2 +-
> >   sound/soc/intel/avs/boards/rt286.c     |  2 +-
> >   sound/soc/intel/avs/boards/rt298.c     |  2 +-
> >   sound/soc/intel/avs/boards/rt5514.c    |  2 +-
> >   sound/soc/intel/avs/boards/rt5640.c    |  2 +-
> >   sound/soc/intel/avs/boards/rt5663.c    |  2 +-
> >   sound/soc/intel/avs/boards/rt5682.c    |  2 +-
> >   sound/soc/intel/avs/boards/ssm4567.c   |  2 +-
> >   sound/soc/samsung/i2s.c                |  2 +-
> 
> This change is outstanding when compared to patches 1-4 which follow the
> per-driver approach.  I'd expect one driver per scope e.g.: Intel's avs
> split away from the rest.

Well, patches 1 and 2 primarily follow the one patch per type of change
approach that happen to only affect one driver each. In the v1 thread I
was asked to split out split out the amd/acp bits which resulted in
patches 3 and 4. (And just now I notice you also replied and asked to
split out intel/avs, too, which I missed. Sorry!)

Conceptually I think one commit per driver is the right approach[1] but
most maintainers/reviewers seem to favour one commit adapting one thing
for all drivers in a subsystem. And in my experience no matter how you
make it, you get a reply to change.

Will split out intel/avs for v3 and maybe hit the sweet spot then.

> Nitpick: s/ASOC/ASoC/

Fixed in my tree, so will be correct in v3.

Best regards
Uwe

[1] My reason for that is the "one atomic change per patch" philosophy
    that allows to document who reviewed/acked what in a fine-grained
    way and allows selective reverting and backporting as needed.
    The downside is that the number of patches explodes, but git is able
    to handle that just fine in my experience. "commit count" is missing
    in https://markcarrigan.net/2026/06/18/the-museum-of-meaningless-metrics/

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature