Hi Kirill. Thanks for the post. Mike > On 25 Oct 2018, at 18:20, Kirill Marinushkin <k.marinushkin@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Hello Takashi, Mike, > > @Takashi > > On 10/25/18 09:37, Takashi Iwai wrote: >> Well, in the API POV, it's nothing wrong to keep hwptr sticking while >> updating only delay value. It implies that the hardware chip doesn't >> provide the hwptr update. > > Thank you for the clarification. Modifying `runtime->delay` from the `pointer` > function looked wrong for me. Now I understand the motivation and the use-case. > I will be more careful when analyzing the code which doesn't fit my expectations. > > @Mike > > I was wrong. You can ignore my comments. Please don't take them personal: it's > all about having high-quality code in kernel. > > Best Regards, > Kirill > _______________________________________________ > Alsa-devel mailing list > Alsa-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > http://mailman.alsa-project.org/mailman/listinfo/alsa-devel _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
