* Negative volume steps?
@ 2011-05-26 11:06 Tanu Kaskinen
2011-05-26 12:25 ` Clemens Ladisch
0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Tanu Kaskinen @ 2011-05-26 11:06 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: alsa-devel
Hi,
If a driver claims that the lowest volume step (integer step, not dB) of
a volume element is -126 and the highest step is 0, is the driver
broken?
I'm asking, because apparently there are such drivers, but Pulseaudio
currently assumes that the volume steps are never negative.
--
Tanu
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: Negative volume steps?
2011-05-26 11:06 Negative volume steps? Tanu Kaskinen
@ 2011-05-26 12:25 ` Clemens Ladisch
2011-05-26 12:45 ` Tanu Kaskinen
0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Clemens Ladisch @ 2011-05-26 12:25 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Tanu Kaskinen; +Cc: alsa-devel
Tanu Kaskinen wrote:
> If a driver claims that the lowest volume step (integer step, not dB) of
> a volume element is -126 and the highest step is 0, is the driver
> broken?
No.
> I'm asking, because apparently there are such drivers, but Pulseaudio
> currently assumes that the volume steps are never negative.
The maximum is higher than the minimum, so how would a step be negative?
What exactly is the problem with PulseAudio?
Regards,
Clemens
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: Negative volume steps?
2011-05-26 12:25 ` Clemens Ladisch
@ 2011-05-26 12:45 ` Tanu Kaskinen
2011-05-26 12:58 ` Takashi Iwai
0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Tanu Kaskinen @ 2011-05-26 12:45 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Clemens Ladisch; +Cc: alsa-devel
On Thu, 2011-05-26 at 14:25 +0200, Clemens Ladisch wrote:
> Tanu Kaskinen wrote:
> > If a driver claims that the lowest volume step (integer step, not dB) of
> > a volume element is -126 and the highest step is 0, is the driver
> > broken?
>
> No.
>
> > I'm asking, because apparently there are such drivers, but Pulseaudio
> > currently assumes that the volume steps are never negative.
>
> The maximum is higher than the minimum, so how would a step be negative?
By "step" I mean the step index, ie. the volume value, not the
difference between two volumes.
> What exactly is the problem with PulseAudio?
Too many assumptions. Thanks for your answer, Pulseaudio needs fixing.
--
Tanu
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: Negative volume steps?
2011-05-26 12:45 ` Tanu Kaskinen
@ 2011-05-26 12:58 ` Takashi Iwai
0 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Takashi Iwai @ 2011-05-26 12:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Tanu Kaskinen; +Cc: alsa-devel, Clemens Ladisch
At Thu, 26 May 2011 15:45:32 +0300,
Tanu Kaskinen wrote:
>
> On Thu, 2011-05-26 at 14:25 +0200, Clemens Ladisch wrote:
> > Tanu Kaskinen wrote:
> > > If a driver claims that the lowest volume step (integer step, not dB) of
> > > a volume element is -126 and the highest step is 0, is the driver
> > > broken?
> >
> > No.
> >
> > > I'm asking, because apparently there are such drivers, but Pulseaudio
> > > currently assumes that the volume steps are never negative.
> >
> > The maximum is higher than the minimum, so how would a step be negative?
>
> By "step" I mean the step index, ie. the volume value, not the
> difference between two volumes.
A negative value is allowed although we are trying to avoid it
usually. But some funky drivers may give such values.
Takashi
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2011-05-26 12:58 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2011-05-26 11:06 Negative volume steps? Tanu Kaskinen
2011-05-26 12:25 ` Clemens Ladisch
2011-05-26 12:45 ` Tanu Kaskinen
2011-05-26 12:58 ` Takashi Iwai
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.