[PATCH] ALSA: HDSP: check for io box before uploading firmware

[PATCH] ALSA: HDSP: check for io box before uploading firmware

[Tim Blechmann]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1474 bytes --]

currently the hdsp driver tries to upload the firmware, even if the
io box is not connected. this patch adds a check for the io box
before trying to upload the firmware.
thus instead of messages complaining about the fifo status and firmware
loading failure, the driver gives a message that no multiface or
digiface is connected.

Signed-off-by: Tim Blechmann <tim@klingt.org>
---
 sound/pci/rme9652/hdsp.c |    5 ++++-
 1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)

diff --git a/sound/pci/rme9652/hdsp.c b/sound/pci/rme9652/hdsp.c
index d723543..cf9eb41 100644
--- a/sound/pci/rme9652/hdsp.c
+++ b/sound/pci/rme9652/hdsp.c
@@ -5045,6 +5045,9 @@ static int __devinit snd_hdsp_create(struct snd_card *card,
 		/* we wait 2 seconds to let freshly inserted cardbus cards do their hardware init */
 		ssleep(2);
 
+		if ((err = hdsp_check_for_iobox(hdsp)) < 0)
+			return err;
+
 		if ((hdsp_read (hdsp, HDSP_statusRegister) & HDSP_DllError) != 0) {
 #ifdef HDSP_FW_LOADER
 			if ((err = hdsp_request_fw_loader(hdsp)) < 0)
@@ -5057,7 +5060,7 @@ static int __devinit snd_hdsp_create(struct snd_card *card,
 				/* init is complete, we return */
 				return 0;
 #endif
-			/* no iobox connected, we defer initialization */
+			/* we defer initialization */
 			snd_printk(KERN_INFO "Hammerfall-DSP: card initialization pending : waiting for firmware\n");
 			if ((err = snd_hdsp_create_hwdep(card, hdsp)) < 0)
 				return err;
-- 
1.5.6.3

[-- Attachment #1.2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 197 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 160 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
Alsa-devel mailing list
Alsa-devel@alsa-project.org
http://mailman.alsa-project.org/mailman/listinfo/alsa-devel

Some questions on snd_kontrol_new

[LCID Fire]

Could someone get me some insight into the snd_kontrol_new?
I'm especially interested in the "private_value" and "index" field. At
least in usb_mixer.c it seems to me like private_value is used as the
index!? If that's the case, when should index be used and when
private_value?
Is there any special convention for the string of "name" field?

Re: Some questions on snd_kontrol_new

[Clemens Ladisch]

LCID Fire wrote:
> Could someone get me some insight into the snd_kontrol_new?
> I'm especially interested in the "private_value" and "index" field. At
> least in usb_mixer.c it seems to me like private_value is used as the
> index!? If that's the case, when should index be used and when
> private_value?

The index field is used when several controls have the same name.

The private_value field can be used by drivers for any purpose.

The functions for the Audigy 2 NX's LEDs store the LED number in the
private_value field so that the same function can be used for all three
LEDs without having to look at the control name.

> Is there any special convention for the string of "name" field?

linux/Documentation/sound/alsa/ControlNames.txt


HTH
Clemens