From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Takashi Iwai Subject: Re: snd_pcm_hardware_t NOT pre-initialized Date: Fri, 06 Sep 2002 18:43:47 +0200 Sender: alsa-devel-admin@lists.sourceforge.net Message-ID: References: <20020829205716.2839.qmail@web11502.mail.yahoo.com> <20020906162801.82599.qmail@web11504.mail.yahoo.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI 1.14.4 - "Hosorogi") Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Return-path: Received: from Cantor.suse.de (ns.suse.de [213.95.15.193]) by alsa.alsa-project.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/SuSE Linux 8.9.3-0.1) with ESMTP id SAA17054 for ; Fri, 6 Sep 2002 18:43:50 +0200 In-Reply-To: <20020906162801.82599.qmail@web11504.mail.yahoo.com> Errors-To: alsa-devel-admin@lists.sourceforge.net List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: To: Guilhem Tardy Cc: alsa-devel@alsa-project.org List-Id: alsa-devel@alsa-project.org At Fri, 6 Sep 2002 09:28:01 -0700 (PDT), Guilhem Tardy wrote: > > Hi, > > snd_pcm_hardware_t is NOT pre-initialized, and drivers are responsible to > define ALL fields necessary. This is too bad, because it essentially means that > a new constraint (i.e. period_size_min + period_size_max) will need to be > supported by all drivers. well, but drivers supporting G72x are very rare. then why bother to change the common code to affect every driver? > > I have tested successfully such a new constraint (patch in attachment), and > hope that you'll incorporate it in the cvs anyway. it'd be better to add the constraint only if the period_size_min and max are non-zero, since most of drivers do NOT want to use this constraint. the similar should be applied to the period_bytes constraint if we add period_size constraint, because they may conflict with each other. ciao, Takashi ------------------------------------------------------- This sf.net email is sponsored by: OSDN - Tired of that same old cell phone? Get a new here for FREE! https://www.inphonic.com/r.asp?r=sourceforge1&refcode1=vs3390