On 2013-05-21 15:36, Arun Raghavan wrote:
On Tue, 2013-05-21 at 16:06 +0300, Tanu Kaskinen wrote:
On Tue, 2013-05-21 at 14:58 +0200, Christian Iversen wrote:
So my question to this list: Is module-suspend-on-idle really a
requirement? How difficult would this be to fix?
Already fixed in the "next" branch :)
And jfyi, since you expressed interest in fixing it, the commit is:
http://cgit.freedesktop.org/pulseaudio/pulseaudio/commit/?h=next&id=cb1ef3c211a90e4ead4738c1059054d6e44d50d9
Ah, good to hear!
It was interesting reading the patch. I think I understand the problem
now. Without the suspend-on-idle module, there's no hook that fires
pa_sink_suspend(s, FALSE, ...) after the rate update, because the module
is not listening.
Whereas in this patch, a new cause flag is implemented and used, so A)
the module will not react to it, and B) it is taken care of outside of
the suspend-on-idle module.
Is that basically correct?
--
Med venlig hilsen
Christian Iversen
_______________________________________________
pulseaudio-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/pulseaudio-discuss
