On 1/30/18 11:42 AM, Takashi Sakamoto wrote:
Hi,
On Jan 30 2018 18:33, Sriram Periyasamy wrote:
From: Ramesh Babu <ramesh.babu@xxxxxxxxx>
Add functions to set/get no-rewind flag
Signed-off-by: Ramesh Babu <ramesh.babu@xxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Sriram Periyasamy <sriramx.periyasamy@xxxxxxxxx>
---
include/pcm.h | 2 ++
include/sound/asound.h | 1 +
src/pcm/pcm.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
src/pcm/pcm_local.h | 1 +
4 files changed, 44 insertions(+)
For this new flag, I post my comment to your work for kernel land[1].
Please refer to it.
[1]
http://mailman.alsa-project.org/pipermail/alsa-devel/2018-January/131336.html
I believed we missed your feedback, thanks for providing the pointer.
You wrote
"In my opinion, when drivers
return appropriate values at implementations of
"struct snd_pcm_ops.pointer" and "struct snd_pcm_ops.ack", your aim is
satisfied. In short, you can let ALSA PCM core to handle
rewinding/forwarding requests from userland for zero number of handled
frames in result. So the 'SNDRV_PCM_HW_PARAMS_NO_REWINDS' flag is
useless"
You may have missed that the hardware needs to know when the stream is
opened if rewinds will be done or not. It's a contract between
application and driver, just like the NO_IRQ mode, not a dynamic choice.
If we enable the hardware capabilities and the application does a
rewind, then it will be a true error with the stream having to be
closed. That's not really desirable, is it?
Regards
Takashi Sakamoto
_______________________________________________
Alsa-devel mailing list
Alsa-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://mailman.alsa-project.org/mailman/listinfo/alsa-devel
_______________________________________________
Alsa-devel mailing list
Alsa-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://mailman.alsa-project.org/mailman/listinfo/alsa-devel
