At 18 Aug 2008 13:16:56 +0200, krzysztof.h1@xxxxxxxxx wrote: > > > At Mon, 18 Aug 2008 10:50:15 +0200, > > Rene Herman wrote: > > > > > > On 17-08-08 22:38, Krzysztof Helt wrote: > > > > > > > From: Krzysztof Helt <krzysztof.h1@xxxxx> > > > > > > > > Mute sound by setting mute bit without > > > > setting volume to 0. It makes both source code > > > > and binary shorter. > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Helt <krzysztof.h1@xxxxx> > > > > > > Grmmbbled-over-by: Rene Herman <rene.herman@xxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > This should be safe and the current function indeed generates crap code > > > > > but in the sense of always expecting the worst broken hardware variants > > > > > to be out there I must say I'd rather have seen that GCC were beter. But > > > > > yes, sure. > > > > Yeah, the slightest concern is the intention of using 0x80 there. > > If this patch was already tested on some real hardwares (and I guess > > it should work), I'm willing to apply it. Krzystof, was this tested > > on your machines? > > > > I have tested it only on cs4236 (inside laptop) and opti931 I have in the old PC at the moment. If you want I can retest on more hardware. > > The second check I noticed that for some registers the volume is defined as gain (so 0 is the least audible) and for some (CS4231_MONO_CTRL, CS4231_LEFT/RIGHT_OUTPUT) is defined as attentuation (the 0 is the most audible). In two cases, the old code set volume to the loudest and mute it with mute bit, probably the opposite what was intended. > > It is not a crucial patch. You may drop it. Oh, no, your patch is actually a correct fix. The thing is that I wanted to be sure that this doesn't introduce an obvious breakage. Takashi _______________________________________________ Alsa-devel mailing list Alsa-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://mailman.alsa-project.org/mailman/listinfo/alsa-devel
