On Wed, Jan 06, 2010 at 05:48:59PM +0200, Jarkko Nikula wrote: > Mark Brown <broonie@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Hrm, no, that's not at all clear to me either. CCing Jarkko who > > contributed the register write control originally. > IIRC, there were some reason to avoid register update by the > dapm_update_bits and negative register value was used to prevent it. > Reg+1 makes sure that the value is negative also for register 0. Ah, you're using some of the shared fields that the generic widget handling code then tries to interpret itself. It'd probably be less surprising to special case this widget in the generic code (as we do in a few other cases, like the PGA ramping). _______________________________________________ Alsa-devel mailing list Alsa-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://mailman.alsa-project.org/mailman/listinfo/alsa-devel
