From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mark Brown Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/1] *** SUBJECT HERE *** Date: Thu, 22 Jul 2010 13:04:46 +0100 Message-ID: <20100722120446.GG4737@rakim.wolfsonmicro.main> References: <1279791534-20028-1-git-send-email-matti.j.aaltonen@nokia.com> <20100722094832.GC4737@rakim.wolfsonmicro.main> <201007221357.16840.peter.ujfalusi@nokia.com> <201007221407.18882.peter.ujfalusi@nokia.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from opensource2.wolfsonmicro.com (opensource.wolfsonmicro.com [80.75.67.52]) by alsa0.perex.cz (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8BE6A243F7 for ; Thu, 22 Jul 2010 14:04:47 +0200 (CEST) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: 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: Takashi Iwai Cc: alsa-devel@alsa-project.org, Peter Ujfalusi , "Aaltonen Matti.J (Nokia-MS/Tampere)" , "lrg@slimlogic.co.uk" List-Id: alsa-devel@alsa-project.org On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 01:30:23PM +0200, Takashi Iwai wrote: > The hw constrains are basically for hw_params setup. So, the question > is whether do we want to make open successful but further setup fails, > or do we give the error at open time? IMO, the latter looks > straightforward. That is, changing the flag before open call is > needed, or we need to check explicitly in the open callback itself. > Or, let me know if I misunderstand the discussion here... I think you understand correctly but we decided we can just totally ignore this setting since from the point of view of application software it can happily do full duplex operations with this device, the device will just discard the data sent to it in some configurations.