> -----Original Message----- > From: David Henningsson [mailto:david.henningsson@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] > Sent: Thursday, October 22, 2015 4:53 PM [snip] > I'll try to explain my suggestion (which I believe Takashi's buying too) one > more time then: > > First, when a monitor is plugged in, we need to dynamically assign this > monitor to five PCM devices. I believe this scheme will be best: > > For a monitor at pin nid 0x05, dev index 0, it will prefer PCM 3. > For a monitor at pin nid 0x06, dev index 0, it will prefer PCM 7. > For a monitor at pin nid 0x07, dev index 0, it will prefer PCM 8. > For a monitor at dev index 1 (any pin), it will prefer PCM 9. > For a monitor at dev index 2 (any pin), it will prefer PCM 10. > > For monitors at dev indices > 2 (can that happen?), or if the PCM is already > assigned to something else, try PCMs in this order: 9, 10, 3, 7, 8. > (Subject to discussion perhaps, I don't think the order matters too much, > because conflicts will be rare in practice.) Hi David, Would you please clarify why PA needs such a fixed binding between PCM 3,7, 8 and pin 0x05,6,7? And how will PA handle PCM 9,10 in a different way? They are not bound to pins, and even not able to dev indexes. In practice, a platform will usually support either a DP port or a HDMI port from the Intel integrated GPU for cost consideration. But theoretically i915 can use same device index on two different pins to connect monitors, e.g. pin 0x05, dev index 2 for one monitor and pin 0x06, dev index 2 for the other. On Intel platforms, the max dev indices is 2. Not sure about Nvidia and AMD. Thanks Mengdong _______________________________________________ Alsa-devel mailing list Alsa-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://mailman.alsa-project.org/mailman/listinfo/alsa-devel
