On Friday 23 November 2007 20:36:32 Jaroslav Kysela wrote:
On Fri, 23 Nov 2007, Takashi Iwai wrote:
At Mon, 19 Nov 2007 12:13:28 +0100, I wrote:
If not, then it is better to remove it/remame to VolumeKnob
Agreed. I'd like to take a safer way if you don't insist...
Great, it is probably the best to have a virtual master volume. Just one question, it will be probably enabled for devices that don't have a master volume (or have it broken like the STAC), right?, And when you expect it to be merged?
Hopefully will be posted in this week after a small brush up.
OK, here is a series of the patch I promised.
The first one is the patch to add virtual master controls.
===
[PATCH] Add virtual master control
This patch adds the routines to create virtual master controls. A virtual master control can have multiple slave controls that are supposed to be identical type. The master volume will add the master attenuation and the master switch will add the master mute switch.
I'm really not sure if I like to see such extensions in kernel. We have now user control elements and a small daemon written in C or python will do exactly same job and will be more flexible.
Jaroslav
Hi,
Well, first big thanks for those patches.
Secondary I strongly disagree that the above can be implemented in userspace easily. Sure you can have a program that adjusts the volume of all outputs, and creates a virtual userspace control, but the change in volume of outputs will be visible to userspace. For example moving the master volume will move the front/surround/LFE/.... sliders, and it is no good.
What this patch does, it actually modifies the code for those 'slave' amps, so the master volume is taken in account.
I will test it now on my system.
I hope this gets merged, Best regards, Maxim Levitsky