From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Clemens Ladisch Subject: Re: Question on wait_for_avail function Date: Wed, 05 Jun 2013 11:17:23 +0200 Message-ID: <51AF0223.5020901@ladisch.de> References: <1794d77072add642c43309c0a06bfadb.squirrel@www.codeaurora.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from out1-smtp.messagingengine.com (out1-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.25]) by alsa0.perex.cz (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7E8C4261A03 for ; Wed, 5 Jun 2013 11:17:28 +0200 (CEST) In-Reply-To: <1794d77072add642c43309c0a06bfadb.squirrel@www.codeaurora.org> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: alsa-devel-bounces@alsa-project.org Sender: alsa-devel-bounces@alsa-project.org To: gsantosh@codeaurora.org Cc: tiwai@suse.de, alsa-devel@alsa-project.org, lgirdwood@gmail.com List-Id: alsa-devel@alsa-project.org gsantosh@codeaurora.org wrote: > 2) HAL issues pause in parallel to the write This is illegal. says: | The use of returned handles [such as snd_pcm_t*] must be serialized in | the application using own locking scheme. If you want to issue a pause while waiting for data to be written, use non-blocking writes. Regards, Clemens