On Mon, Dec 18, 2023 at 01:58:47PM +0100, Pierre-Louis Bossart wrote: > > why not have a single API that does both? First check if it is supported > > and then allocate buffers and do the transfer.. What are the advantages > > of using this two step process > > Symmetry is the only thing that comes to my mind. Open - close and send > - wait are natural matches, aren't they? > > We do need a wait(), so bundling open() and send() would be odd. > I agree send->wait->close would be odd, But you just bundle close into wait. So the API becomes just send->wait, which seems pretty logical. > But you have a point that the open() is not generic in that it also > prepares the DMA buffers for transmission. Maybe it's more natural to > follow the traditional open(), hw_params(), hw_free, close() from ALSA. I think this just makes it worse, you are now adding even more calls. The problem I see here is that, open and close (at least to me) strongly implies that you can do multiple operations between them and unless I have misunderstood something here you can't. Thanks, Charles
