From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Lennart Poettering Subject: how is 'dir' in snd_pcm_hw_params_set_periods_near() supposed to work? Date: Mon, 8 Sep 2008 22:28:08 +0200 Message-ID: <20080908202808.GB5221@tango.0pointer.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from tango.0pointer.de (tango.0pointer.de [85.214.72.216]) by alsa0.perex.cz (Postfix) with ESMTP id 220B224391 for ; Mon, 8 Sep 2008 22:28:09 +0200 (CEST) Content-Disposition: inline List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: alsa-devel-bounces@alsa-project.org Errors-To: alsa-devel-bounces@alsa-project.org To: ALSA Development Mailing List List-Id: alsa-devel@alsa-project.org Heya! How is the 'dir' argument in snd_pcm_hw_params_set_periods_near() supposed to work? I'd assume that passing dir=1 would mean that it is looked for a number of periods that is greater *or equal* to what we request. If we pass dir=-1 we'd be looking for a number of periods that is smaller *or equal* to what we request. However, what I am experiencing is that there is no "or equal". On my softvol on hda setup here if I ask for 5 periods I will always get 6 if I pass dir=1 -- even if the could give me 5 and will give me five if I pass dir=0. The docs don't really elaborate on this much. I'd certainly think that having ">=" and "<=" here is much more useful and natural than ">" and "<", and hence I was wondering: is this just a bug in the software or is it really intended to be this way? Lennart -- Lennart Poettering Red Hat, Inc. lennart [at] poettering [dot] net ICQ# 11060553 http://0pointer.net/lennart/ GnuPG 0x1A015CC4