On Thu, Nov 05, 2015 at 11:27:39AM +0530, Vinod Koul wrote: > On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 04:36:14PM +0100, Charles Keepax wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 09:02:49PM +0530, Vinod Koul wrote: > > > On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 08:37:11PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote: > > > > On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 12:47:58PM -0500, Pierre-Louis Bossart wrote: > > > > > > > > If you need to set parameters maybe we should also change the definition of > > > > > snd_enc_generic so that the reserved fields can be used for custom > > > > > parameters, or document that their use is permitted for this sort of ID. > > > > > > > > It does mean the core can't grab them but quite what the core is > > > > supposed to usefully do for something like this is unclear to me so... > > > > > > Well in case of compressed formats, core doesn't do anything, we just act as > > > a transport and shove down data and information. > > > > > > I do like Pierre's idea of giving some meaning to formats and use some > > > reserved fields, but somehow I can't think of a clean solution for this! > > > > Personally, I feel a bit like doing nothing at the moment might > > be the best solution. If BESPOKE is for icky stuff that won't be > > generic trying to pull out generic fields to go in snd_enc_generic > > seems like a challenging exercise, and we can look submissions > > that use it and keep an eye out for anything that might be > > generic enough to go in there, rather than adding a bunch of > > stuff that ends up never getting used. > > So what is the conclusion here..? Are we all okay with this approach? I was planning to send out a v2 shortly, just adding a comment by the reserved fields in snd_enc_generic to say its ok to use them if using BESPOKE and see where that gets us. Thanks, Charles _______________________________________________ Alsa-devel mailing list Alsa-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://mailman.alsa-project.org/mailman/listinfo/alsa-devel
