On Wed, 2007-05-09 at 14:20 -0700, John L. Utz III wrote: > On Wed, 09 May 2007 22:47:34 +0200 > "Joachim Förster" <mls.JOFT@xxxxxx> wrote: > > My question is: Does the architecture described below make sense/is > > reasonable with ALSA and Linux? > > i think you might have to answer an earlier question first; 'does it > make sense to call this an ac97 controller?' I dont recall seeing a > ring buffer as part of the ac97 standard. i'd suggest that you take the > time to flesh out completely how the ring buffer is supposed to replace > dma and ram while still presenting an ac97 set of verbs because i am > stuck with the gut feeling that you will some important things will > have to be really different. Hmmm, well is there a standard document for AC97 controllers, too? So far, I know about the AC97 Codec standard, only. Anyway, just ignore the "AC97" in front of "controller" - a custom controller for an AC97 Codec, which uses the described way of operation and features. The/My question is, if such a thing is reasonable and fits into ALSA/Linux. > > I read, that many applications don't work, if MMAP mode is not > > supported and classic read/write (copy()/silence()) is used, only. Is > > there a black list of apps, which don't work? > > i doubt seriously that such a thing exists, how could it? new apps are > written everyday, old apps in binary only form get 'shimmed' forward > with comaptibility libraries to work in newer operating systems. So, not using MMAP mode is just a no-go ... ? I don't want to write a driver which cannot be used with most ALSA applications out there. Joachim _______________________________________________ Alsa-devel mailing list Alsa-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://mailman.alsa-project.org/mailman/listinfo/alsa-devel
