From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Peter Kirk Subject: Re: smart and automatic use of dmix and dsnoop - feature suggestion. Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 21:28:12 +0100 Sender: alsa-devel-admin@lists.sourceforge.net Message-ID: <200311172128.34259.pwk.linuxfan@gmx.de> References: <200311171936.hAHJaW1B013634@oud.linuxaudiosystems.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: In-Reply-To: Content-Disposition: inline Errors-To: alsa-devel-admin@lists.sourceforge.net List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: To: Jaroslav Kysela Cc: alsa-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, Paul Davis List-Id: alsa-devel@alsa-project.org WARNING: Unsanitized content follows. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Am Montag, 17. November 2003 21:05 schrieb Jaroslav Kysela: > On Mon, 17 Nov 2003, Paul Davis wrote: > > >what you say seems to be valid to me, but not if you implement smart > > > dmix the way I said =3D). The way I suggested *every* application wou= ld > > > connect to smart dmix, and none directly to alsa lib (except those th= at > > > use devices like hw: - and those should never be mixed). Since every > > > stream is connected to smart dmix, there is no need to *reroute* > > > anything in the case of needed mixing. The only thing that has to > > > happen, is that the new stream, that has to be mixed into the existing > > > one due to hardware limitations has to be resampled etc. to make mixi= ng > > > possible. > > > > believe or not, i actually think that peter is right here. if dmix > > works well enough to be used by any application, then i think it > > should be used for all non-hw accesses unless the user configures it > > otherwise. if it doesn't work this well, it should :) > > Ok, maybe we all talk about same thing. Sure, if the code is matured > enough, we can use it as default. But I only want to note that dmix > - even with one stream - won't be ever equal to the raw hardware access > (hw:#,#). Hum, about the "maturity" of dmix - I cant realy comment on it. All I know is, t= hat=20 it should be possible to do what I am suggesting eventualy. Since I am not = a=20 coder I dont have any idea on the restrictions/limitations of the current= =20 dmix implementation, and how hard it is to overcome them. All I know is: Its possible, and you are the best guys on the job, so you c= an=20 do it =3D). It would (in my opinion) be the biggest achievment in easiness = to=20 setup soundcards since many years. And its worth some effort to make it wor= k. How dmix would handle a single stream - I dont know why it should be modifi= ed=20 by dmix. But appart from that, the "smartdmix" would just pass through sing= le=20 soundstreams, they wouldnt ever get near any dmixing... Peter - --=20 The Shuttle is now going five times the sound of speed. -- Dan Rather, first landing of Columbia -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQE/uS9cg2ieGvTmHiURAkiIAJ46SAlueVdrPsSyL594m+iiUitm5wCeN0SF 9gUG4BsY1zNnCPNaruOjLso=3D =3DWzuy -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- ------------------------------------------------------- This SF. Net email is sponsored by: GoToMyPC GoToMyPC is the fast, easy and secure way to access your computer from any Web browser or wireless device. Click here to Try it Free! https://www.gotomypc.com/tr/OSDN/AW/Q4_2003/t/g22lp?Target=mm/g22lp.tmpl