From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Clemens Ladisch Subject: Re: Negative volume steps? Date: Thu, 26 May 2011 14:25:39 +0200 Message-ID: <4DDE46C3.5000006@ladisch.de> References: <1306408004.4306.53.camel@jarl> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from out3.smtp.messagingengine.com (out3.smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.27]) by alsa0.perex.cz (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8116D103868 for ; Thu, 26 May 2011 14:23:28 +0200 (CEST) In-Reply-To: <1306408004.4306.53.camel@jarl> 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: Tanu Kaskinen Cc: alsa-devel@alsa-project.org List-Id: alsa-devel@alsa-project.org Tanu Kaskinen wrote: > If a driver claims that the lowest volume step (integer step, not dB) of > a volume element is -126 and the highest step is 0, is the driver > broken? No. > I'm asking, because apparently there are such drivers, but Pulseaudio > currently assumes that the volume steps are never negative. The maximum is higher than the minimum, so how would a step be negative? What exactly is the problem with PulseAudio? Regards, Clemens