On 23. 04. 24 19:22, Chris Wulff wrote: >> From: Pavel Hofman <pavel.hofman@xxxxxxxxxxx> >> Sent: Tuesday, April 23, 2024 11:38 AM > >>> + p_it_name playback input terminal name >>> + p_ot_name playback output terminal name >>> + p_fu_name playback function unit name >>> + p_alt0_name playback alt mode 0 name >>> + p_alt1_name playback alt mode 1 name >> >> Nacked-by: Pavel Hofman <pavel.hofman@xxxxxxxxxxx> >> >> I am not sure adding a numbered parameter for every additional alt mode >> is a way to go for the future. I am not that much concerned about UAC1, >> but IMO (at least) in UAC2 the configuration method should be flexible >> for more alt setttings. I can see use cases with many more altsettings. >> >> My proposal for adding more alt settings >> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://lore.kernel.org/linux-usb/35be4668-58d3-894a-72cf-de1afaacae45@xxxxxxxxxxx/__;!!HBnMciuwfVSXJQ!TYg7j7-fh3eZAzPfiONi2lo54mf2qsWtpG0nwdaQwSqd1nGdKkTDN8o6_lSIWlWPtHoc-2Nz1KCbRhiXJnzXO8Ku1w$ >> suggested using lists to existing parameters where each item would >> correspond to the alt setting of the same index (+1). That would allow >> using more altsettings easily, without having to add parameters to the >> source code and adding configfs params. I received no feedback. I do not >> push the param list proposal, but I am convinced an acceptable solution >> should be discussed thoroughly by the UAC2 gadget stakeholders. >> >> I am afraid that once p_alt1_name/c_alt1_name params are accepted, there >> will be no way back because subsequent removal of configfs params could >> be viewed as a regression for users. > > I have been thinking about this as well. The alt names are slightly different than the rest of the settings > since they also include alt mode 0. I was thinking p/c_alt1_name could be expanded to the array so > that the entries line up with the other settings and don't have an extra entry for alt 0. Perhaps a different > name would make more sense. > > Along those lines, I didn't see any gadget drivers using an array of strings for anything, which is also why > I didn't try to do anything here that merged alt0/1 names into an array. If we were to do an array of strings > I'm not sure what the best separator would be. Maybe ";"? The rates array uses ",". > > This patch only exposes the existing strings to make them configurable, but I don't want to do anything > that would preclude a nice interface for extra alt modes. > Thanks a lot for your response. Please can you take a look at https://lore.kernel.org/linux-usb/72e9b581-4a91-2319-cb9f-0bcb370f34a1@xxxxxxxxxxx/T/#m68560853b0c7bc2478942d1f953caa2ac95512bd ? If the params in the upper level were to stand as defaults for the altsettings (and for the existing altsetting 1 if no specific altset subdir configs were given), maybe the naming xxx_alt1_xxx could become a bit confusing. E.g. p_altx_name or p_alt_non0_name? Thanks a lot, Pavel.
