From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Richard Fitzgerald Subject: Re: [PATCH TINYCOMPRESS 1/14] compress: Add function to get timestamp in samples Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2013 17:24:29 +0000 Message-ID: <20130219172429.GB32279@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> References: <20130210000227.GA31139@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> <20130211063448.GA3789@intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from opensource.wolfsonmicro.com (opensource.wolfsonmicro.com [80.75.67.52]) by alsa0.perex.cz (Postfix) with ESMTP id 01923265234 for ; Tue, 19 Feb 2013 18:24:31 +0100 (CET) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20130211063448.GA3789@intel.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: alsa-devel-bounces@alsa-project.org Sender: alsa-devel-bounces@alsa-project.org To: Vinod Koul Cc: alsa-devel@alsa-project.org List-Id: alsa-devel@alsa-project.org >I am fine with adding new API for returning the samples, but then why return the >raw struct. Would make sense to just get samples if that is only thing desired. Is there a need to hide the underlying ALSA structs from a client of tinyalsa? If so, why? Might other fields in snd_compr_tstamp be useful to the client? If so it's cleaner to just return them all instead of having to spawn several different functions the client has to call to get a snd_compr_tstamp and then return each field separately. If snd_compr_tstamp is basically useless to any tinycompress client except for the value of pcm_io_frames (and maybe sampling_rate?) then I'm ok with just returning those instead of the raw snd_compr_tstamp.