On Tue, 28 Apr 2009, Takashi Iwai wrote: > Well, I think it'd be better, at this moment for 2.6.30, to allow > problematic drivers to skip the jiffies check. Adding the fundamental > change at this late stage is bad, especially if the change wasn't > tested much by many others and has an influence on user-side API. > > So, as I proposed, we can simply add the pcm info check, and add > BATCH flag to needed drivers. Of course, it still requires some > more testing, but basically it'll take back to the old behavior and > should be safer. > > Meanwhile, applying the delay account patch now for 2.6.31 should be > good (ealier is better). It doesn't conflict with the info flag > check, so we can work parallel. Could we just add the runtime->delay variable without touching other code (pcm status), to correct the jiffies based check now? It seems like a good step forward to me and the lowlevel drivers will be more prepared for next PCM midlevel code changes. Jaroslav ----- Jaroslav Kysela <perex@xxxxxxxx> Linux Kernel Sound Maintainer ALSA Project, Red Hat, Inc. _______________________________________________ Alsa-devel mailing list Alsa-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://mailman.alsa-project.org/mailman/listinfo/alsa-devel
