At Fri, 26 May 2006 11:38:11 +0200, Pierre Ossman wrote: > > Some io plug-ins might want to adjust the reported delay value and not > strictly follow the current buffer usage (that's why we have two calls > after all). > > Allow them to specify a delay() callback and use the previous behaviour > if they don't. > > Signed-off-by: Pierre Ossman <ossman@xxxxxxxxx> > > ? ioplug-delay.patch > Index: include/pcm_ioplug.h > =================================================================== > RCS file: /cvsroot/alsa/alsa-lib/include/pcm_ioplug.h,v > retrieving revision 1.5 > diff -u -r1.5 pcm_ioplug.h > --- include/pcm_ioplug.h 24 May 2005 09:42:01 -0000 1.5 > +++ include/pcm_ioplug.h 25 May 2006 19:05:23 -0000 > @@ -130,6 +130,10 @@ > */ > snd_pcm_sframes_t (*pointer)(snd_pcm_ioplug_t *io); > /** > + * get the delay for the running PCM; optional > + */ > + int (*delay)(snd_pcm_ioplug_t *io, snd_pcm_sframes_t *delayp); > + /** > * transfer the data; optional > */ > snd_pcm_sframes_t (*transfer)(snd_pcm_ioplug_t *io, The change is OK, but please remind that the API has been already public, so we need to keep the compatibility as much as possible. This addition will break the binary compatibility. First, we need the increase of version number (SND_PCM_IOPLUG_VERSION) if we modify API. If the version of the object is older, either reject or allow it as compatible. One way to keep it binary-compatible is to append the new method to the end of the callback table, and check the version before accessing the new method (and handle as NULL for older version). Could you rewrite the patch in that manner? Thanks, Takashi _______________________________________________ Alsa-devel mailing list Alsa-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/alsa-devel
