Re: [RFC PATCH] ALSA: compress: Add SND_AUDIOCODEC_BESPOKE'

[Charles Keepax <ckeepax@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>]

On Thu, Nov 05, 2015 at 11:27:39AM +0530, Vinod Koul wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 04:36:14PM +0100, Charles Keepax wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 09:02:49PM +0530, Vinod Koul wrote:
> > > On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 08:37:11PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 12:47:58PM -0500, Pierre-Louis Bossart wrote:
> > > 
> > > > > If you need to set parameters maybe we should also change the definition of
> > > > > snd_enc_generic so that the reserved fields can be used for custom
> > > > > parameters, or document that their use is permitted for this sort of ID.
> > > > 
> > > > It does mean the core can't grab them but quite what the core is
> > > > supposed to usefully do for something like this is unclear to me so...
> > > 
> > > Well in case of compressed formats, core doesn't do anything, we just act as
> > > a transport and shove down data and information.
> > > 
> > > I do like Pierre's idea of giving some meaning to formats and use some
> > > reserved fields, but somehow I can't think of a clean solution for this!
> > 
> > Personally, I feel a bit like doing nothing at the moment might
> > be the best solution. If BESPOKE is for icky stuff that won't be
> > generic trying to pull out generic fields to go in snd_enc_generic
> > seems like a challenging exercise, and we can look submissions
> > that use it and keep an eye out for anything that might be
> > generic enough to go in there, rather than adding a bunch of
> > stuff that ends up never getting used.
> 
> So what is the conclusion here..? Are we all okay with this approach?

I was planning to send out a v2 shortly, just adding a comment by
the reserved fields in snd_enc_generic to say its ok to use them
if using BESPOKE and see where that gets us.

Thanks,
Charles