Re: [pulseaudio-discuss] [PATCH 1/4] bluetooth/sbc: Use __asm__ keyword

2011-09-04 Thread Arun Raghavan
Maarten Bosmans wrote: >OK, I'll see what I can do. > >But I was under the impression that the code had diverged enough from >the upstream code that we effectively were maintaining our own version >(fork). Perhaps that impression is wrong. The code should be fairly in sync. We do a periodic up

Re: [pulseaudio-discuss] RFC: Database formats on upgrade - auto-convert and save or just auto-convert

2011-09-04 Thread Arun Raghavan
Maarten Bosmans wrote: >2011/9/4 Colin Guthrie : >> Hi, >> >> Generally speaking we'll try and not write stuff to disk if the user >> does not trigger a change. >> >> Currently in git master, if we encounter a legacy database format, we >> convert it on the fly and then *write it to disk*. >> >

Re: [pulseaudio-discuss] [PATCH 1/4] bluetooth/sbc: Use __asm__ keyword

2011-09-04 Thread Maarten Bosmans
OK, I'll see what I can do. But I was under the impression that the code had diverged enough from the upstream code that we effectively were maintaining our own version (fork). Perhaps that impression is wrong. I did find something similar in rtkit.c and submitted that upstream (well, to Lennart

Re: [pulseaudio-discuss] RFC: Database formats on upgrade - auto-convert and save or just auto-convert

2011-09-04 Thread Maarten Bosmans
2011/9/4 Colin Guthrie : > Hi, > > Generally speaking we'll try and not write stuff to disk if the user > does not trigger a change. > > Currently in git master, if we encounter a legacy database format, we > convert it on the fly and then *write it to disk*. > > We could avoid the writing to disk

Re: [pulseaudio-discuss] [PATCH 1/4] bluetooth/sbc: Use __asm__ keyword

2011-09-04 Thread Arun Raghavan
Maarten Bosmans wrote: >--- > src/modules/bluetooth/sbc/sbc_primitives_armv6.c |4 +- > src/modules/bluetooth/sbc/sbc_primitives_iwmmxt.c |4 +- > src/modules/bluetooth/sbc/sbc_primitives_mmx.c| 14 +- >src/modules/bluetooth/sbc/sbc_primitives_neon.c | 28 >++

Re: [pulseaudio-discuss] RFC: Database formats on upgrade - auto-convert and save or just auto-convert

2011-09-04 Thread John Haxby
Hi, On 4 Sep 2011, at 11:34, Colin Guthrie wrote: > What do you think the best route forward here is? > > 1. Convert on the fly only. > 2. Convert on the fly and write to disk. Although not directly related, I used to work on a mail server (Scalix) that periodically updated its database format

Re: [pulseaudio-discuss] Segfault at saving legacy database entries

2011-09-04 Thread Colin Guthrie
'Twas brillig, and Colin Guthrie at 01/09/11 11:16 did gyre and gimble: > 'Twas brillig, and David Henningsson at 01/09/11 09:57 did gyre and gimble: >> Or maybe save a temporary null-port entry that is used later (as a >> fallback is there is no port entry)? > > This seems more sensible, but it's

[pulseaudio-discuss] RFC: Database formats on upgrade - auto-convert and save or just auto-convert

2011-09-04 Thread Colin Guthrie
Hi, Generally speaking we'll try and not write stuff to disk if the user does not trigger a change. Currently in git master, if we encounter a legacy database format, we convert it on the fly and then *write it to disk*. We could avoid the writing to disk without any operational issue (if the us