From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Takashi Iwai Subject: Re: updated patch for period_size constraint Date: Tue, 10 Sep 2002 19:11:30 +0200 Sender: alsa-devel-admin@lists.sourceforge.net Message-ID: References: <20020910170631.58483.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 TAA29817 for ; Tue, 10 Sep 2002 19:11:36 +0200 In-Reply-To: <20020910170631.58483.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 Tue, 10 Sep 2002 10:06:31 -0700 (PDT), Guilhem Tardy wrote: > > > just add the constraint in open callback, such like > > > > int your_pcm_open(snd_pcm_substream_t *substream) > > { > > ... > > > > err = snd_pcm_hw_constraint_minmax(runtime, SNDRV_PCM_HW_PARAM_PERIOD_SIZE, > > your_period_size_min, your_period_size_max); > > ... > > } > > > > this is the cleanest solution. > > Sure, but then I also need to define .period_bytes_min and .period_bytes_max in > my snd_pcm_hardware_t, right? This is quite feasible, indeed. yes. they can be 0 and MAX_INT, so that they never restrict the condition, if you don't want these parameters affecting the behavior. (this is not tested but should work ;) 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