At Thu, 30 Sep 2010 10:39:30 +0200, David Henningsson wrote: > > On 2010-09-30 08:58, Takashi Iwai wrote: > > At Wed, 29 Sep 2010 10:14:49 +0200, > > David Henningsson wrote: > >> > >> I'm researching a few bugs where the user claims position_fix=1 helps > >> the problem, but adding the quirk for that model surprisingly didn't. So > >> looking at the code, I concluded that the difference was > >> via_dmapos_patch, and that they all had via_dmapos_patch=1, and that > >> via_dmapos_patch=0 helped them solve the problem. Three out of five (not > >> all of them have reported back on via_dmapos_patch=0 yet) are VIA > >> controllers rev 10. > >> > >> So we now have VIA controllers that need via_dmapos_patch=0. > > I'm cc:ing Joseph here. You were the one writing via_dmapos_patch > originally, could you confirm the suspicion that VIA controller rev 10 > (and possibly more) actually should have via_dmapos_patch turned off? > > >> > >> I can think of a few approaches here: > >> > >> 1) since position_fix=1 implicitly sets via_dmapos_patch to 0 (maybe > >> unintentionally), we should add a position_fix=3 meaning lpib + > >> via_dmapos_patch=1 > >> > >> 2) figure if something has changed recently (as in "within the last > >> year"...) that has made via_dmapos_patch=1 work worse than before > >> > >> 3) figure out if there are several ATI/VIA controllers that actually > >> never wants the patch. > >> > >> Any thoughts? > > > > All sound as reasonable proposals. > > The 1 is easy. David, could you care to send a patch?' > > Something like this (untested)? Looks good. Applied now. thanks, Takashi _______________________________________________ Alsa-devel mailing list Alsa-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://mailman.alsa-project.org/mailman/listinfo/alsa-devel
