From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Takashi Iwai <tiwai@suse.de>
Subject: Re: RFC: minimalistic TLV implementation
Date: Thu, 01 Jun 2006 17:13:23 +0200
Message-ID: <s5hejy87vu4.wl%tiwai@suse.de>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.61.0605311500480.9226@tm8103.perex-int.cz>
	<s5hzmgx6rtb.wl%tiwai@suse.de>
	<Pine.LNX.4.61.0606011510010.9144@tm8103.perex-int.cz>
	<s5hpsht6lo6.wl%tiwai@suse.de>
	<Pine.LNX.4.61.0606011602020.9144@tm8103.perex-int.cz>
	<s5hirnl6isc.wl%tiwai@suse.de>
	<Pine.LNX.4.61.0606011645530.9144@tm8103.perex-int.cz>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI 1.14.6 - "Maruoka")
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <alsa-devel-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net>
Received: from mx1.suse.de (mail.suse.de [195.135.220.2])
	by alsa.jcu.cz (ALSA's E-mail Delivery System) with ESMTP id 066C815A
	for <alsa-devel@alsa-project.org>;
	Thu,  1 Jun 2006 17:13:24 +0200 (MEST)
Received: from Relay1.suse.de (mail2.suse.de [195.135.221.8])
	(using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
	(No client certificate requested)
	by mx1.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id CE6F3ED1C
	for <alsa-devel@alsa-project.org>;
	Thu,  1 Jun 2006 17:13:23 +0200 (CEST)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.61.0606011645530.9144@tm8103.perex-int.cz>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/alsa-devel>,
	<mailto:alsa-devel-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum=alsa-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:alsa-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Help: <mailto:alsa-devel-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/alsa-devel>,
	<mailto:alsa-devel-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=subscribe>
Sender: alsa-devel-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net
Errors-To: alsa-devel-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net
To: Jaroslav Kysela <perex@suse.cz>
Cc: ALSA development <alsa-devel@alsa-project.org>
List-Id: alsa-devel@alsa-project.org

At Thu, 1 Jun 2006 17:00:30 +0200 (CEST),
Jaroslav Kysela wrote:
> 
> On Thu, 1 Jun 2006, Takashi Iwai wrote:
> 
> > At Thu, 1 Jun 2006 16:08:13 +0200 (CEST),
> > Jaroslav Kysela wrote:
> > > 
> > > On Thu, 1 Jun 2006, Takashi Iwai wrote:
> > > 
> > > > Yes.  It's similar but a really big difference if you consider about
> > > > 32/64bit compatibility.
> > > > 
> > > > Also, the order of "TLV" is type-length-value.
> > > 
> > > Ok, the second version of my patch. Note: in the ca0106 driver, only
> > > three lines (if I don't count one empty line) are required to add
> > > the dB scale information.
> > 
> > The existence of flag makes the things complicated.
> > I prefer removing flag and make the ioctl numid-specific.
> 
> It might be. It's really small work for the user space and we may use
> flags in future to determine ioctl version or some other extension at the
> ioctl level.

Well, but this ioctl is damn simple.  Just query a control element for
its TLV data.

It's supposed to be the one containing all.  If we need a filter of
returned data, the query header should contain a type field rather
than flags.


Takashi