On Wed, Mar 11, 2020 at 08:41:27AM +0100, Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote: > On Tue, Mar 10, 2020 at 12:45:44PM +0000, Mark Brown wrote: > > So why doesn't DPCM recognize that the path is inactive and why is it > > better to do this than fix whatever the issue is there? > Of course that would be better abd I'd much prefer that. Unfortunately I > haven't been able to find a single scenario in which those paths would be > exercised. As far as I understand path pruning should take place e.g. > when a mixer modifies audio routing and as a result disables a certain > pipeline, which is then pruned. If I could reproduce such a scenario I > would be able to first check whether it's working, then see exactly how > it is working and then see how best to add my use case to it. Since I > wasn't able to find such a scenario, my only option was to preserve > the current state and add my own path "on top." I'd be happy to try the > other path too, I just need a use case, that I can reproduce. It's still not clear to me what the issue is here. If something is making a modification to the graph which needs a recheck or update I'd expect that these things happen along with that modification. I don't understand what you're saying about not being able to reproduce scenarios or adding things "on top".
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
