On 11/03/2011 09:41 PM, Tanu Kaskinen wrote:
Some comments below. I don't have time right now to go through it all,
but I'll continue later. You might have to wait until Monday for the
rest, though, if Colin or Arun doesn't do the review before me.
Thanks for the review. There are some cases where I think it's mostly
your taste against mine and I would like to know (from Colin or Arun) on
how to proceed. I don't want to lose momentum here (altough it took a
few days for me to answer; because I was busy with the Ubuntu
Developer's conference last week).
> So pa_alsa_path_probe() should always set p->probed to TRUE. Instead
> of setting it three times, I think it would be better to set it
> immediately after the "if (p->probed)" check in the beginning.
Good point. Fixing.
> I have not thought this through, but would it make sense to use the
> path name as the key to ps->paths, and if there are collisions, do
> the path renaming here instead of using the
> path_set_make_paths_unique() function later?
In general, it would make the most sense to do the paths_unique after
all possible removals, to avoid unnecessary indices: e g, if you have
paths "Foo", "Bar" and one more "Foo", and the first "Foo" is a subset
of "Bar", then we would not like the second "Foo" to be renamed to "Foo 2".
> What if some path is removed from all path sets? Does it still exist
> in the profile set, and if so, will a client-visible port be created
> for it?
It will remain in the profile set, but no port will be created - when
adding ports (see module-alsa-card.c:add_profiles) we'll walk through
all profiles to see what ports to add.
--
David Henningsson, Canonical Ltd.
http://launchpad.net/~diwic
_______________________________________________
pulseaudio-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/pulseaudio-discuss
