Re: [Alsa-devel] s/pdif controls

2003-03-11 Thread Dan Hollis
On Tue, 11 Mar 2003, Paul Davis wrote: i agree. but why are the status bit fields so long? is this following IEC958 specs? Yes. They are large. The only full description of the status bitfields I have ever found is in the AD1892 datasheet. I have archived a copy here:

Re: [Alsa-devel] s/pdif controls

2003-03-11 Thread Benny Sjostrand
i agree. but why are the status bit fields so long? is this following IEC958 specs? Yes. They are large. The only full description of the status bitfields I have ever found is in the AD1892 datasheet. I have archived a copy here: http://bani.anime.net/bookmarkz/AD1892_0.pdf -Dan Another

Re: [Alsa-devel] s/pdif controls

2003-03-11 Thread Dan Hollis
On Tue, 11 Mar 2003, Benny Sjostrand wrote: Another spec. from Cirrus that explains all the IEC958 bitfields, I guess this one is well known. I got a copy on http://www.cucumelo.org/~gorm/an22.pdf It doesn't explain all the subcodes though... -Dan -- [-] Omae no subete no kichi wa ore no

[Alsa-devel] s/pdif controls

2003-03-08 Thread Paul Davis
how are users supposed to set various s/pdif bits? the existing control formats involve massive bitfields that are totally impenetrenable to almost everyone. what is the strategy here? if someone wants to turn the pro/consumer bit on/off, what are they supposed to do?