On 17/02/17 16:53, Takashi Iwai wrote:
The problem is that you pass always the compound object as the
converter argument. As you already suggested, there are two cases:
one is a string array and another is a compound with optional args.
In your code, the first iteration doesn't check which type is. So it
always fails if the string array is passed.
Well, it does actually work in both cases but I guess that the plugin
could get passed an unexpected type of compound config converter
parameter in some cases.
That is, the right implementation is to check whether the given
compound is a string array is. If yes, it goes to the old style
loop (and you can check "name" argument properly). If not, it goes
with the new compound argument. That's simple enough, and more
understandable the condition you used for the loop termination.
The following makes the difference more explicit What do you think?
else if (snd_config_get_type(converter) == SND_CONFIG_TYPE_COMPOUND) {
snd_config_iterator_t i, next;
int pos = 0, is_array = 0;
/*
* If the convertor compound is an array of alternatives then
the id of
* the first element will be "0" (or maybe NULL). Otherwise
assume it is
* a structure and must have a "name" id to identify the
converter type.
*/
snd_config_for_each(i, next, converter) {
snd_config_t *n = snd_config_iterator_entry(i);
const char *id;
snd_config_get_id(n, &id);
if (pos++ == 0 && (!id || strcmp(id, "0") == 0))
is_array = 1;
if (!is_array && strcmp(id, "name") != 0)
continue;
if (snd_config_get_string(n, &type) < 0)
break;
err = rate_open_func(rate, type, is_array ? NULL :
converter, 0);
if (!err || !is_array)
break;
}
BTW, one another thing:
>@@ -1386,7 +1414,7 @@ int snd_pcm_rate_open(snd_pcm_t **pcmp, const char *name,
> #else
> type = "linear";
> open_func = SND_PCM_RATE_PLUGIN_ENTRY(linear);
>- err = open_func(SND_PCM_RATE_PLUGIN_VERSION, &rate->obj, &rate->ops);
>+ err = open_func(SND_PCM_RATE_PLUGIN_VERSION, &rate->obj, &rate->ops, 0);
Is this really correct? I thought SND_PCM_RATE_PLUGIN_ENTRY() refers
to the old style?
Yes, left over from earlier version where I just changed the old func's
signature.
Alan.
_______________________________________________
Alsa-devel mailing list
Alsa-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://mailman.alsa-project.org/mailman/listinfo/alsa-devel
