On Sat, Sep 03, 2011 at 08:36:25AM +0530, Vinod Koul wrote:
On Fri, 2011-09-02 at 15:36 +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
On Fri, Sep 02, 2011 at 11:36:24AM +0530, Vinod Koul wrote:
- TBD how the cpu dai will be viewed and started.
- ASoC should always be optional part
- (we should be able to use this framework in non asoc systems
Just write an ALSA core API, ASoC is an ALSA driver so it can just use the same interfaces as everything else gets.
Actually no. That way devices would get regsitered as /dev/snd_pcmCxDxy which wont be corect.
I'm sorry, I can't understand why this would be the case? ALSA already has devices with several different names (control, hw, and pcm).
- runtime->state = SNDRV_PCM_STATE_OPEN;
- init_waitqueue_head(&runtime->sleep);
- data->stream.runtime = runtime;
- f->private_data = (void *)data;
Should we hoist these before we call open(), especially the init of runtime? It seems likely to be more robusy.
Since open is just supposed to let the device know that stream is being created with a particular direction. Event if I move this up, doesn't serve a purpose as driver should touch these a t open. But I agree this helps to make more robust
The most obvious ones were the runtime pointer and the state, I can easily see some configuration being done on init that might also be done at later and so want to check the state.
Well I kept them placeholder to remind me what else needs implementation, I think I will keep them for a while as we need to implement mmap and recording support as well. Recording is actually trivial after playback.
It's generally preferred to omit this sort of stuff from actual upstream submissions.
+EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(snd_compr_period_elapsed);
I can see why you picked period_elapsed() (for consistency) but it feels wrong to have a time based name for something which is going to end up being data size based.
Yes the notion of period here cannot be time it is in bytes.
Right, but the trouble is that "period" generally means a unit of time so it doesn't read right.