At Tue, 25 May 2004 01:00:58 GMT,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> 188,189c188,189
> < .period_bytes_min = 64,
> < .period_bytes_max = (32*1024),
> ---
> > .period_bytes_min = (16*1024),
> > .period_bytes_max = (16*1024),
are you sure this change is correct?
in the current code, the period size is always bound to
(buffer_size / 2) (because periods_min = periods_max = 2).
so you don't have to limit period_bytes or period_size.
> 732,733c732,733
> < // snd_emu10k1x_intr_enable(chip, (INTE_CH_0_LOOP<<1);
> < // snd_emu10k1x_intr_enable(chip, INTE_CH_0_LOOP<<2);
> ---
> > snd_emu10k1x_intr_enable(chip, (INTE_CH_0_LOOP|INTE_CH_0_HALF_LOOP)<<1);>
> > snd_emu10k1x_intr_enable(chip, (INTE_CH_0_LOOP|INTE_CH_0_HALF_LOOP)<<2);
hmm, it looks redundant.
the second line will override the setting of the first line.
i guess you wanted like the following?
snd_emu10k1x_intr_enable(chip,
(INTE_CH_0_LOOP|INTE_CH_0_HALF_LOOP)<<1 |
(INTE_CH_0_LOOP|INTE_CH_0_HALF_LOOP)<<2);
Takashi
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by: Oracle 10g
Get certified on the hottest thing ever to hit the market... Oracle 10g.
Take an Oracle 10g class now, and we'll give you the exam FREE.
http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=3149&alloc_id=8166&op=click
_______________________________________________
Alsa-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/alsa-devel
