linux-kernel - Re: hda-intel: no soundcard with current linus' git tree

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 18 Oct 2007 15:49:22 +0200
From:	Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.de>
To:	Maxim Levitsky <maximlevitsky@...il.com>
Cc:	Thomas Meyer <thomas@...3r.de>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	alsa-devel@...a-project.org
Subject: Re: hda-intel: no soundcard with current linus' git tree

At Thu, 18 Oct 2007 16:21:59 +0200,
Maxim Levitsky wrote:
> 
> On Thursday 18 October 2007 07:57:27 Takashi Iwai wrote:
> > At Thu, 18 Oct 2007 03:53:08 +0200,
> > Maxim Levitsky wrote:
> > > 
> > > From 0824b077b75c19253b45c5a455775c331acd54ee Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> > > From: Maxim Levitsky <maximlevitsky@...il.com>
> > > Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2007 03:35:37 +0200
> > > Subject: [PATCH] [HDA] [STAC] Since there is now a master volume control,
> > > don't call the headphone output "Master", it isn't strictly correct anyway
> > 
> > I thought stac925x has no volume knob, so "Master" should be still
> > applied for this codec?
> 
> Yes, you are right, but stac925x has only one DAC, and thus if it is
> connected to any line-out, it will be 
> 'Front', but if it is connected to 'headphones' only, then why not
> to call it 'Headphone' 

The point is that apps usually require a "Master" volume.  If it's the
single volume control, it's better to call it master for convenience.


> STAC  9200 has no volumeknob too, but it is handled seperartly

Yes, 9200 doesn't call stac92xx_auto_create_hp_ctls(), so it's not
affected.

> STAC  9202 and 9250 has no volumeknob too, but as I said they have
> just one DAC again 

Both are handled as patch_stac925x.  That's what I meant.  With your
patch, there will be no master any more.

So, how about the patch below?


Takashi

diff -r fb9512ce24e0 pci/hda/patch_sigmatel.c
--- a/pci/hda/patch_sigmatel.c	Thu Oct 18 10:48:43 2007 +0200
+++ b/pci/hda/patch_sigmatel.c	Thu Oct 18 16:36:35 2007 +0200
@@ -111,6 +111,7 @@ struct sigmatel_spec {
 	unsigned int alt_switch: 1;
 	unsigned int hp_detect: 1;
 	unsigned int gpio_mute: 1;
+	unsigned int no_vol_knob :1;
 
 	unsigned int gpio_mask, gpio_data;
 
@@ -1930,7 +1931,8 @@ static int stac92xx_auto_create_hp_ctls(
 	}
 	if (spec->multiout.hp_nid) {
 		const char *pfx;
-		if (old_num_dacs == spec->multiout.num_dacs)
+		if (old_num_dacs == spec->multiout.num_dacs &&
+		    spec->no_vol_knob)
 			pfx = "Master";
 		else
 			pfx = "Headphone";
@@ -2487,6 +2489,7 @@ static int patch_stac9200(struct hda_cod
 	codec->spec = spec;
 	spec->num_pins = ARRAY_SIZE(stac9200_pin_nids);
 	spec->pin_nids = stac9200_pin_nids;
+	spec->no_vol_knob = 1;
 	spec->board_config = snd_hda_check_board_config(codec, STAC_9200_MODELS,
 							stac9200_models,
 							stac9200_cfg_tbl);
@@ -2541,6 +2544,7 @@ static int patch_stac925x(struct hda_cod
 	codec->spec = spec;
 	spec->num_pins = ARRAY_SIZE(stac925x_pin_nids);
 	spec->pin_nids = stac925x_pin_nids;
+	spec->no_vol_knob = 1;
 	spec->board_config = snd_hda_check_board_config(codec, STAC_925x_MODELS,
 							stac925x_models,
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/