[alsa-devel] [PATCH] ALSA: USB-audio: Add support for Novation Nocturn MIDIcontrol surface
The Nocturn needs the MIDI_RAW_BYTES quirk, like other Novation devices.
Tested that the Nocturn shows up in aconnect, and that it can be used as a control surface (using the xtor synthesizer patch editor).
Signed-off-by: Ricard Wanderlof ricardw@axis.com ---
I've noticed that checkpatch complains about the space between the & and (, but in the interest of consistency I've not changed this. Is there some reason for the space, or would it be worth while cleaning up the file?
sound/usb/quirks-table.h | 9 +++++++++ 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+)
diff --git a/sound/usb/quirks-table.h b/sound/usb/quirks-table.h index e475665..99de061 100644 --- a/sound/usb/quirks-table.h +++ b/sound/usb/quirks-table.h @@ -2664,6 +2664,15 @@ YAMAHA_DEVICE(0x7010, "UB99"), } }, { + USB_DEVICE(0x1235, 0x000a), + .driver_info = (unsigned long) & (const struct snd_usb_audio_quirk) { + /* .vendor_name = "Novation", */ + /* .product_name = "Nocturn", */ + .ifnum = 0, + .type = QUIRK_MIDI_RAW_BYTES + } +}, +{ USB_DEVICE(0x1235, 0x000e), .driver_info = (unsigned long) & (const struct snd_usb_audio_quirk) { /* .vendor_name = "Novation", */
On Fri, 16 Oct 2015 13:38:33 +0200, Ricard Wanderlof wrote:
The Nocturn needs the MIDI_RAW_BYTES quirk, like other Novation devices.
Tested that the Nocturn shows up in aconnect, and that it can be used as a control surface (using the xtor synthesizer patch editor).
Signed-off-by: Ricard Wanderlof ricardw@axis.com
Applied, thanks.
I've noticed that checkpatch complains about the space between the & and (, but in the interest of consistency I've not changed this. Is there some reason for the space, or would it be worth while cleaning up the file?
Simply ignore it in this case. checkpatch.pl is often just grumbling. You can remove the space, but it won't give any better readability either.
thanks,
Takashi
sound/usb/quirks-table.h | 9 +++++++++ 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+)
diff --git a/sound/usb/quirks-table.h b/sound/usb/quirks-table.h index e475665..99de061 100644 --- a/sound/usb/quirks-table.h +++ b/sound/usb/quirks-table.h @@ -2664,6 +2664,15 @@ YAMAHA_DEVICE(0x7010, "UB99"), } }, {
- USB_DEVICE(0x1235, 0x000a),
- .driver_info = (unsigned long) & (const struct snd_usb_audio_quirk) {
/* .vendor_name = "Novation", *//* .product_name = "Nocturn", */.ifnum = 0,.type = QUIRK_MIDI_RAW_BYTES- }
+}, +{ USB_DEVICE(0x1235, 0x000e), .driver_info = (unsigned long) & (const struct snd_usb_audio_quirk) { /* .vendor_name = "Novation", */ -- 2.1.4
-- Ricard Wolf Wanderlöf ricardw(at)axis.com Axis Communications AB, Lund, Sweden www.axis.com Phone +46 46 272 2016 Fax +46 46 13 61 30
Ricard Wanderlof wrote:
I've noticed that checkpatch complains about the space between the & and (, but in the interest of consistency I've not changed this. Is there some reason for the space
Yes. But it's not a particularly substantial reason, and you're not the first person to mention this checkpatch complaint, so feel free to kill them.
would it be worth while cleaning up the file?
Yes, it would be worth while cleaning up the file by restoring the proper VID/PID order of the entries. :)
Regards, Clemens
On Fri, 16 Oct 2015, Clemens Ladisch wrote:
Ricard Wanderlof wrote:
I've noticed that checkpatch complains about the space between the & and (, but in the interest of consistency I've not changed this. Is there some reason for the space
Yes. But it's not a particularly substantial reason,
... and what is it pray tell ...? ;-)
and you're not the first person to mention this checkpatch complaint, so feel free to kill them.
would it be worth while cleaning up the file?
Yes, it would be worth while cleaning up the file by restoring the proper VID/PID order of the entries. :)
I hadn't even noticed that. I suppose it does not really make that much of a difference, as if you're looking for a specific device you'd just do an ordinary search through the file. But of course it makes sense if nothing else as it makes it clear exactly where to add a new entry.
/Ricard
On Sun, 18 Oct 2015 08:30:07 +0200, Ricard Wanderlof wrote:
and you're not the first person to mention this checkpatch complaint, so feel free to kill them.
would it be worth while cleaning up the file?
Yes, it would be worth while cleaning up the file by restoring the proper VID/PID order of the entries. :)
I hadn't even noticed that. I suppose it does not really make that much of a difference, as if you're looking for a specific device you'd just do an ordinary search through the file. But of course it makes sense if nothing else as it makes it clear exactly where to add a new entry.
The advantage of ordering in the id number is to catch / avoid doubly entries. Just for reading, grouping with the same quirk type would be better, but this often results in duplicated entries without noticing.
Takashi
participants (3)
-
Clemens Ladisch -
Ricard Wanderlof -
Takashi Iwai