Re: Jack event API - decision needed

Mark Brown
2011-06-29T06:59:45Z

On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 07:34:11AM +0200, Takashi Iwai wrote:
> Mark Brown wrote:

> > It needs a subset of the current information - it should report only
> > audio events, so pretty much only headphone, microphone or line out
> > presence.

> Is that really all for PA, for now, and even for future?
> That's my primary question. Was this clarified in the thread...?

Well, that was what Kay and Lennart were keen on - the information for a
given subsystem should be reported via that subsystem so all the other
information we're reporting currently should be going via some other
subsystem.

Like I keep saying I still don't have a clear picture as to how this
would actually be implemented in userspace and how practical it is.

> > Anything else needs to be reported via a different API and
> > figured out by userspace, and the input device should stay there for
> > button press events.

> The first and the second part are independent, IMO.
> That is, whether using the input-jack device in future is an open
> question. It might be better to re-implement in a new API in a
> unified way, for example.

You're missing my point here. The point is not the switches, the point
is the buttons on the jacks - they need to go via the input API and not
the ALSA API.

> Of course, keeping the old API is mandatory, so we'll still keep
> the input-jack code in future, though.

That too.