From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from alsa0.perex.cz (alsa0.perex.cz [77.48.224.243]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 02DFEC25B76 for ; Sat, 8 Jun 2024 16:46:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: from alsa1.perex.cz (alsa1.perex.cz [207.180.221.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by alsa0.perex.cz (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A087093A; Sat, 8 Jun 2024 18:46:16 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 alsa0.perex.cz A087093A DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=alsa-project.org; s=default; t=1717865186; bh=nOGnpHia4alHQ+PuzhuuxOc4Zcu0wjvDSpcU48Tw/Qk=; h=From:To:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:Date:List-Id:List-Archive: List-Help:List-Owner:List-Post:List-Subscribe:List-Unsubscribe: From; b=rlSEKpsgErLUQh+OFBzpgFQfemLHh8532tlHLgGxc71M5QlicY+wVYI18ehIppiVQ nxpVq0MY30Dgl5qlZVAbwNQFO3UvtOreWFDYnmEMVNLTztor3AWl4xDL61LEj0y0S5 d+I0P9KhIn/cd0iR6M6kzUYOl78Z8eme1XksQmmw= Received: by alsa1.perex.cz (Postfix, from userid 50401) id 3021BF80578; Sat, 8 Jun 2024 18:45:55 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mailman-core.alsa-project.org (mailman-core.alsa-project.org [10.254.200.10]) by alsa1.perex.cz (Postfix) with ESMTP id D0A7FF80107; Sat, 8 Jun 2024 18:45:54 +0200 (CEST) Received: by alsa1.perex.cz (Postfix, from userid 50401) id DAB93F804D6; Sat, 8 Jun 2024 18:45:49 +0200 (CEST) Received: from webhooks-bot.alsa-project.org (vmi242170.contaboserver.net [207.180.221.201]) by alsa1.perex.cz (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9A25AF80107 for ; Sat, 8 Jun 2024 18:45:45 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 alsa1.perex.cz 9A25AF80107 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: GitHub issues - opened To: alsa-devel@alsa-project.org In-Reply-To: <1717865137360209227-webhooks-bot@alsa-project.org> References: <1717865137360209227-webhooks-bot@alsa-project.org> Subject: [modern hardware] interleaved or plannar? Message-Id: <20240608164549.DAB93F804D6@alsa1.perex.cz> Date: Sat, 8 Jun 2024 18:45:49 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID-Hash: DXZIMPKEMGKDMJQSTDNYC4TAFMOBBAME X-Message-ID-Hash: DXZIMPKEMGKDMJQSTDNYC4TAFMOBBAME X-MailFrom: github@alsa-project.org X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency; loop; banned-address; member-moderation; header-match-alsa-devel.alsa-project.org-0; header-match-alsa-devel.alsa-project.org-1; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.9 Precedence: list List-Id: "Alsa-devel mailing list for ALSA developers - http://www.alsa-project.org" Archived-At: List-Archive: List-Help: List-Owner: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: alsa-project/alsa-lib issue #400 was opened from sylware: To have the less "technical distance" with modern audio hardware (for instance usb audio 2), is it better to have interleaved audio frames each with a pitch, or brutally planar with a pitch per plane? Issue URL : https://github.com/alsa-project/alsa-lib/issues/400 Repository URL: https://github.com/alsa-project/alsa-lib