On 2014-10-19 01:02, Raymond Yau wrote:
In the scenario where there is one "Line Out", one "Speaker"
and one
"Headphone", and there are only two DACs, two outputs will
share a DAC.
Currently any mixer on such a DAC will get the "PCM" name,
which is
misleading. Instead use "Headphone+LO" or "Speaker+LO" to better specify what the volume actually controls.
Are there any examples ?
I used "hda-emu
codecs/canonical/alc3226-dell-precision-m2800-ccert-201404-14986 -i
1" when
developing the patches.
I don't have any hardware available myself that exposes this
behavior,
but I can maybe fake one with hdajackretask, if that counts...
How about adding these names to slaves of virtual master
volume/switch ?
hdajackretask won't help if the topology of the codecs are different
Seem the badness still prevent the driver to support surround 5.1 with three rear panel jacks, internal speaker and front panel headphone for Thinkcenter A58 using alc662
https://www.mail-archive.com/alsa-user@lists.sourceforge.net/msg29203.html
Why 3stack desktops with 6 channels codecs not using
"Headphone+LO" or
"Speaker+LO" ?
The problem is just the lack of DACs, so it cannot cover all three outputs, no matter how the pins are chosen. That is, it's no 6 channels at all but 4 channels at most.
http://shop.lenovo.com/us/en/desktops/thinkcentre/a-series/a58/
The technical specification of a58
2 pin internal speaker connector Alc662 5.1
https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=156433
Seem windows support surround 5.1
Raymond, there can certainly be cases which this patch does not cover - after all, it's mostly a band aid given the lack of topology information - but do you see cases where this patch actually causes a *regression*? If so, could you point me to alsa-info for the machine where this patch causes a regression?