On 10/17/2012 03:51 PM, David Henningsson wrote:
On 10/17/2012 03:21 PM, Tanu Kaskinen wrote:
On Wed, 2012-10-17 at 14:55 +0200, David Henningsson wrote:
Yes, setting "Mic Jack Mode" to "Line" would turn of the VREF pin of the
codec, i e, the phantom power to the microphone. In "Mic" mode there's
usually a phantom power of 80% of Vdd. (I have never actually measured
this - I'm just looking at the HDA spec.)
So my argument is more about confusion ("Hey, PulseAudio says I've got a
line in port, but I don't have one, let's file a bug!").
Which scenario do you mean:
1) The user complains, because he sees a line-in port even though
nothing is plugged in
That's the current situation.
or
2) The user complains, because he sees a line-in port even though the
the connector has only a mic symbol, and not a combined mic & line-in
symbol?
The user complains because he sees *both* a line-in port and a mic port,
even though he only has one port (with a mic symbol on it).
If you mean scenario 1, do you agree that having two ports would be
better, if both get marked unavailable when nothing is plugged in? (It's
probably not so easy to write the code to implement that, and if I had
to choose between the one-port solution and no solution at all, I'd
choose the one-port solution.)
I'm a bit hesitant myself about which one is better; have two ports
showing up at plug in, or just the mic one.
Also, it is not very difficult to write a new path or two to cover this
specific scenario, but I'm also starting to feel that the model for
paths is starting to get difficulties to scale.
Pushed on the basis that
1) the patch is better than the current handling
2) there were no comments by anyone else
If somebody feels strongly about adding a "Line In" path for this
particular scenario, I'm okay with that.
--
David Henningsson, Canonical Ltd.
https://launchpad.net/~diwic
_______________________________________________
pulseaudio-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/pulseaudio-discuss
