From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: =?iso-8859-1?q?Ren=E9_Rebe?= Date: Mon, 09 Jan 2006 13:05:23 +0000 Subject: Re: [Alsa-devel] Re: [OT] ALSA userspace API complexity Message-Id: <200601091405.23939.rene@exactcode.de> List-Id: References: <20050726150837.GT3160@stusta.de> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Jaroslav Kysela Cc: Hannu Savolainen , Takashi Iwai , linux-sound@vger.kernel.org, ALSA development , LKML Hi, On Sunday 08 January 2006 10:24, Jaroslav Kysela wrote: > > > > > - PCM with non-interleaved formats > > > > There is no need to handle non-interleaved data in kernel level drivers > > > > because all the devices use interleaved formats. > > > > > > Many RME boards support only non-intereleave data. > > In such cases it's better to do interleavin/deinterleaving in the kernel > > rather than forcing the apps to check which method they should use. > > I don't think so. The library can do such conversions (and alsa-lib does) > quite easy. If we have a possibility to remove the code from the kernel > space without any drawbacks, then it should be removed. I don't see any > advantage to have such conversions in the kernel. Also, when the data is already available as single streams in a user-space multi track application, why should it be forced interleaved, when the hardware could handle the format just fine? Yours, Rene -- ExactCODE, Berlin