Re: ANN: AudioScience driver beta 0.3 (0.9.6)

Re: ANN: AudioScience driver beta 0.3 (0.9.6)

[Eliot Blennerhassett]

Takashi Iwai wrote:

> At Sun, 14 Sep 2003 22:57:04 -0700 (PDT),
> Eliot Blennerhassett wrote:
> 
>>The latest beta ALSA driver for AudioScience sound cards is available as a
patch
>>against ALSA release 0.9.6 - download it here:
>>
> 
> any chance to get the whole things into alsa tree?

Takashi,

I would love to get this into the ALSA tree.  
How do I go about doing this? 
Are there changes I need to make to the code to make it "acceptable"?

When you say the "whole thing", do you mean the ALSA part of our driver, or
including our underlying HPI driver.



> otherwise it's difficult to merge and submit to 2.6 kernel tree.
> 
> 
> Takashi
> 

-- 
Eliot Blennerhassett                       *:-{)>
AudioScience, Inc. (New Zealand Office)
6 Centaurus Rd             
Christchurch 8002          Mobile: +64 21 1183531
New Zealand                Ph    : +64  3 3327818
eblennerhassett@audioscience.com
<http://www.audioscience.com>


Eliot Blennerhassett
AudioScience Inc.
--
Junk footer beyond this point. Read at your own risk.


-------------------------------------------------------------
Sign up for ICQmail at http://www.icq.com/icqmail/signup.html


-------------------------------------------------------
This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
Welcome to geek heaven.
http://thinkgeek.com/sf

Re: ANN: AudioScience driver beta 0.3 (0.9.6)

[Takashi Iwai]

At Mon, 15 Sep 2003 15:39:04 -0700 (PDT),
Eliot Blennerhassett wrote:
> 
> Takashi Iwai wrote:
> 
> > At Sun, 14 Sep 2003 22:57:04 -0700 (PDT),
> > Eliot Blennerhassett wrote:
> > 
> >>The latest beta ALSA driver for AudioScience sound cards is available as a
> patch
> >>against ALSA release 0.9.6 - download it here:
> >>
> > 
> > any chance to get the whole things into alsa tree?
> 
> Takashi,
> 
> I would love to get this into the ALSA tree.  
> How do I go about doing this? 
> Are there changes I need to make to the code to make it "acceptable"?

firstly, Jaroslav and I will review the patch.
the patch itself looks almost ok, if the indentation follows the
standard kernel style (see linux/Documentation/CondingStyle).

> When you say the "whole thing", do you mean the ALSA part of our driver, or
> including our underlying HPI driver.

i meant the latter, including HPI driver.

since the HPI driver part is the essential part of the driver, we
surely need more review for that, too.

IIRC, the HPI driver is GPL, so won't it be problem, right? 

when the audioscience driver is promoted to the linux 2.6.0 kernel
tree, it must be anyway a complete set.  then putting the whole stuffs
into alsa directory tree would be the easiest solution, i think.


Takashi


-------------------------------------------------------
This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
Welcome to geek heaven.
http://thinkgeek.com/sf

Re: ANN: AudioScience driver beta 0.3 (0.9.6)

[Eliot Blennerhassett]

Takashi Iwai wrote:

<snip>
> the question is, again, whether we should include HPI driver code in
> the ALSA tree.  this means that the code would be changed often by us,
> ALSA developers, or by other people, too.  what do you think?

I have no objection to that happening.  We'll see after the code has been
reviewed whether it is the best thing to do.  The current patch code compiles OK
without the HPI driver installed.   It is only at driver load time that HPI
driver is needed.

Initially, I imagine that most people will have better things to do than to mess
with "our" code.  
It would be an advantage to us to have it supported by the nice configure and
build system.

I suppose there is a risk of code divergence between our internal codebase and
the version in ALSA tree, however I think there is good motivation on both sides
to keep in sync so that the ALSA version doesn't fall behind as we add new
features.  

For our purposes the HPI code gets built into various windows drivers as well as
the Linux HPI driver.  So for our purposes we have to keep all that working.
Particularly, Linux applications using the HPI API and ioctl interface must
continue to work alongside ALSA access.  (i.e. for multistream cards, one stream
and output can be used by ALSA for system sound etc, the rest by a dedicated HPI
application).

regards


Eliot Blennerhassett
AudioScience Inc.
--
Junk footer beyond this point. Read at your own risk.


-------------------------------------------------------------
Sign up for ICQmail at http://www.icq.com/icqmail/signup.html


-------------------------------------------------------
This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
Welcome to geek heaven.
http://thinkgeek.com/sf

Re: ANN: AudioScience driver beta 0.3 (0.9.6)

[Eliot Blennerhassett]

Takashi Iwai wrote:

>>>any chance to get the whole things into alsa tree?
>>
>>Takashi,
>>
>>I would love to get this into the ALSA tree.  
>>How do I go about doing this? 
>>Are there changes I need to make to the code to make it "acceptable"?
> 
> 
> firstly, Jaroslav and I will review the patch.
> the patch itself looks almost ok, if the indentation follows the
> standard kernel style (see linux/Documentation/CondingStyle).

Getting asihpi.c into standard style should not be too much work.

>>When you say the "whole thing", do you mean the ALSA part of our driver, or
>>including our underlying HPI driver.
> 
> i meant the latter, including HPI driver.
> 
> since the HPI driver part is the essential part of the driver, we
> surely need more review for that, too.

Please, go ahead... tell me the worst - I won't be surprised.
 
> IIRC, the HPI driver is GPL, so won't it be problem, right? 

No problem with using the code.  However, it is extremely unlikely that we will
redo all the HPI files to meet the CodingStandard.  I have read it and it does
say "preferred" not "mandatory".

If its just a matter of running them all through "indent -kr -i8" then thats OK.

> when the audioscience driver is promoted to the linux 2.6.0 kernel
> tree, it must be anyway a complete set.  then putting the whole stuffs
> into alsa directory tree would be the easiest solution, i think.
> 
> 
> Takashi


Eliot Blennerhassett
AudioScience Inc.
--
Junk footer beyond this point. Read at your own risk.


-------------------------------------------------------------
Sign up for ICQmail at http://www.icq.com/icqmail/signup.html


-------------------------------------------------------
This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
Welcome to geek heaven.
http://thinkgeek.com/sf

Re: ANN: AudioScience driver beta 0.3 (0.9.6)

[Takashi Iwai]

At Tue, 16 Sep 2003 21:56:56 -0700 (PDT),
Eliot Blennerhassett wrote:
> 
> Takashi Iwai wrote:
> 
> >>>any chance to get the whole things into alsa tree?
> >>
> >>Takashi,
> >>
> >>I would love to get this into the ALSA tree.  
> >>How do I go about doing this? 
> >>Are there changes I need to make to the code to make it "acceptable"?
> > 
> > 
> > firstly, Jaroslav and I will review the patch.
> > the patch itself looks almost ok, if the indentation follows the
> > standard kernel style (see linux/Documentation/CondingStyle).
> 
> Getting asihpi.c into standard style should not be too much work.
 
ok.

> >>When you say the "whole thing", do you mean the ALSA part of our driver, or
> >>including our underlying HPI driver.
> > 
> > i meant the latter, including HPI driver.
> > 
> > since the HPI driver part is the essential part of the driver, we
> > surely need more review for that, too.
> 
> Please, go ahead... tell me the worst - I won't be surprised.
>  
> > IIRC, the HPI driver is GPL, so won't it be problem, right? 
> 
> No problem with using the code.  However, it is extremely unlikely that we will
> redo all the HPI files to meet the CodingStandard.  I have read it and it does
> say "preferred" not "mandatory".
 
sure, it's not mandatory.

i don't think the coding style is a big matter.
i asked it because it's simply *better* for maintainability.  but if
you'd like to keep it, it's ok, too.

the question is, again, whether we should include HPI driver code in
the ALSA tree.  this means that the code would be changed often by us,
ALSA developers, or by other people, too.  what do you think?


Takashi


-------------------------------------------------------
This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
Welcome to geek heaven.
http://thinkgeek.com/sf

ANN: AudioScience driver beta 0.3 (0.9.6)

[Eliot Blennerhassett]

The latest beta ALSA driver for AudioScience sound cards is available as a patch
against ALSA release 0.9.6 - download it here:

Read this first:
http://www.audioscience.com/internet/download/beta/asialsa.txt

Get the patch:
http://www.audioscience.com/internet/download/beta/alsa-driver-0.9.6asihpi-0.3.tar.gz

please let me know if you have success or otherwise with this driver.

thanks


Eliot Blennerhassett
AudioScience Inc.
--
Junk footer beyond this point. Read at your own risk.


-------------------------------------------------------------
Sign up for ICQmail at http://www.icq.com/icqmail/signup.html


-------------------------------------------------------
This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
Welcome to geek heaven.
http://thinkgeek.com/sf

Re: ANN: AudioScience driver beta 0.3 (0.9.6)

[Takashi Iwai]

At Sun, 14 Sep 2003 22:57:04 -0700 (PDT),
Eliot Blennerhassett wrote:
> 
> The latest beta ALSA driver for AudioScience sound cards is available as a patch
> against ALSA release 0.9.6 - download it here:
> 
> Read this first:
> http://www.audioscience.com/internet/download/beta/asialsa.txt
> 
> Get the patch:
> http://www.audioscience.com/internet/download/beta/alsa-driver-0.9.6asihpi-0.3.tar.gz
> 
> please let me know if you have success or otherwise with this driver.

any chance to get the whole things into alsa tree?
otherwise it's difficult to merge and submit to 2.6 kernel tree.


Takashi


-------------------------------------------------------
This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
Welcome to geek heaven.
http://thinkgeek.com/sf