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