On Sun, 2007-12-02 at 23:02 +0100, Lars Luthman wrote: > So if everyone agrees that the header should be > > { > uint32_t timestamp_int; > uint32_t timestamp_frc; > uint16_t size; > uint16_t type; > } > > with data padded to 4+N*16 bytes, can't we just say that the code part > is done? Whether the different events types are implemented as aligned > platform-dependent structs or raw packed bytes or something else doesn't > matter at all to the event transport extension and it doesn't make any > sense to argue about it until we actually have a fixed way of sending > events.
Agreed (enough digression and nitpicking!). What's in the payload doesn't matter (and everything is nicely aligned anyway). Does everyone like this event header? -DR- _______________________________________________ Linux-audio-dev mailing list Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-dev