[Portaudio] Alsa: support for sub-device & 24-bit BE format only

Ross Bencina rossb-lists at audiomulch.com
Tue Apr 3 21:19:18 EDT 2012


Hi Alan,

There seem to me to be only two issues:

1) Without Dmitry's patch (or equivalent) there is no way to access some 
hw devices from PA. Given that PA currently favours hw over plughw this 
is a bug imho, and some version of Dmitry's fix is a valid change.

2) There is a need to clarify which ALSA device access methods PA 
supports, from hw on up the abstraction chain.

Having read the various comments, I think that it will be necessary to 
continue to support either direct access of the hw device, or some 
equivalent via plughw that accomodates everyone's requirements.

If you feel that dealing with Dmitry's changes is getting in the way of 
addressing other issues, or is an ongoing stability risk, then I think 
we should roll it back and develop a cleaner fix on a branch.

My concerns about Dmitry's patch are mainly around stability, 
correctness and clenliness -- the patch has obviously caused disruptions 
that could have been avoided if there had been more attention to this -- 
ending the disruption should be given priority.

In short: I agree that we don't want trunk broken. Due care needs to be 
taken when working on shared code.

On the other hand, given that the patch is a fix for a genuine 
shortcoming in PA, I don't think we need to resolve (2) before resolving 
(1).

A first step would be to create two tickets for (1) and (2) with links 
to this thread in the mailing list archive.

Ross.



On 4/04/2012 1:50 AM, Alan Horstmann wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Richard's comments are very helpful - thanks.
>
> There is a lot of discussion to be had on this one, unfortunately; there are
> more aspects that I am realising, to complicate things further.  But at the
> moment I am trying to get a certain level of testing and bug-fixes completed,
> from the recent base.
>
> It seems to me we need to achieve 2 things:
>
> a)  get the present Portaudio code trunk 'head' back to a state where we/I
> could be happy to recommend someone to 'update to latest', and other fixes
> can be applied,
>
> b)  establish a mechanism for holding all the discussion content that this has
> raised in such a way that it enables the issues to be considered and resolved
> over some time period, without loosing parts, or having to repeat things.
>
> I am inclined to think the best way forward would be to revert the commit (for
> now), open a ticket (with perhaps a patch giving the equivalent change) or
> create some document page where the discussion can be placed.   The
> converters issue has lead to questioning how Alsa devices are treated
> altogether.  Until that is broadly decided the code details can't be
> resolved.
>
> Regards
>
> Alan
> _______________________________________________
> Portaudio mailing list
> Portaudio at music.columbia.edu
> http://music.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/portaudio
>


More information about the Portaudio mailing list