At Tue, 20 Jul 2010 08:39:16 +0300, Peter Ujfalusi wrote:
Hi,
On Monday 19 July 2010 19:25:55 ext Takashi Iwai wrote:
At Mon, 19 Jul 2010 11:30:38 +0100,
Mark Brown wrote:
On Mon, Jul 19, 2010 at 12:14:49PM +0300, Peter Ujfalusi wrote:
I see, but I still don't see problem with this:
Meh, that works but I guess my brain can't imagine concepts that ugly :)
TLV_DB_MINMAX would be slightly easier to parse:
static const unsigned int tlv[] = { TLV_DB_RANGE_HEAD(3), 1, 3, TLV_DB_MINMAX_ITEM(0, 400), 3, 4, TLV_DB_MINMAX_ITEM(400, 500) 4, 6, TLV_DB_MINMAX_ITEM(500, 900), };
I agree, that the TLV_DB_MINMAX might be easier to digest, but I want to keep the TLV_DB_SCALE in these drivers (tpa6130a2, and tlw4030). I might need to limit the volume range, and that is not really possible with the MINMAX (the ASoC volume limiting only works with TLV_DB_SCALE type).
OK, it sounds reasonable.
thanks,
Takashi