Hello guys, On Thu, Aug 06, 2009 at 08:15:40PM +0200, Nurkkala Eero.An (EXT-Offcode/Oulu) wrote: > > >> > >> I would say the default mode for the omap34xx should be also element as > >> it keeps the omap_pcm_pointer behavior the same than currently and > >> avoids possible regression. > > > > Yes, the default mode should be the element mode in my opinion as well. > > > > -- > > Péter > > > Well, the element mode is fine for !McBSP2. One doesn't really loose the > buffer pointer accuracy, because you can get the last DMA irq timestamp > with SNDRV_PCM_IOCTL_TTSTAMP (and compare that to current time). > The accuracy is not far off from the element mode? (If you read the DMA > portion of TRM, I think there were some issues as well) > > Don't want to be piccy, but McBSP2 with element mode is more or less like > a "joke"? As there's a large HW bugger, why not take advantage of it..why > "bypass" it as default? > > For !McBSP2, it doesn't even pay to have the threshold mode at all, because > the effect on PM is actually adverse - too frequent wakeups will cause more > adverse net effect on PM (IIRC) @ VBAT. I agree with Eero in this point. We can set mcbsp2 default op mode to threshold. I think we are even here :) two believe that must be element mode by default, while two want default threshold (at least for mcbsp2). We need another opinion. > > - Eero -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe alsa-devel" in > the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html -- Eduardo Valentin _______________________________________________ Alsa-devel mailing list Alsa-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://mailman.alsa-project.org/mailman/listinfo/alsa-devel
