On Tue, 09 Apr 2019 16:23:17 +0200,
Pierre-Louis Bossart wrote:
>
>
> > ok, thanks for confirming. we'll remove the INFO_RESUME flag in SOF
> > and follow-up with the removal on all other Intel drivers. Thanks
> > for enlightening us on this.
>
> Actually one more question related to the documentation, which reads
>
> "Note that the trigger with SUSPEND can always be called when
> snd_pcm_suspend_all() is called, regardless of the
> SNDRV_PCM_INFO_RESUME flag. The RESUME flag affects only the behavior
> of snd_pcm_resume(). (Thus, in theory, SNDRV_PCM_TRIGGER_RESUME isn’t
> needed to be handled in the trigger callback when no
> SNDRV_PCM_INFO_RESUME flag is set. But, it’s better to keep it for
> compatibility reasons.)"
>
> I could not figure out what the last sentence means. It's my
> understanding that the resume_trigger will never be called with the
> code flow below when INFO_RESUME isn't declared. Would you mind
> clarifying what this compatibility might be? Thanks!
Well, in the above "better to keep it" text -- here "it" was meant as
SNDRV_PCM_TRIGGER_RESUME case handling in the trigger callback, not as
SNDRV_PCM_INFO_RESUME flag. That is, the above recommends a trigger
callback like below would keep SNDRV_PCM_TRIGGER_RESUME although it
won't be called practically:
static int foo_trigger(....)
{
switch (cmd) {
case SNDRV_PCM_TRIGGER_START:
case SNDRV_PCM_TRIGGER_RESUME:
do_start();
break;
case SNDRV_PCM_TRIGGER_STOP:
case SNDRV_PCM_TRIGGER_SUSPEND:
do_stop();
break;
....
}
....
}
This text needs clearly a better rephrasing...
Takashi
_______________________________________________
Alsa-devel mailing list
Alsa-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://mailman.alsa-project.org/mailman/listinfo/alsa-devel
