From owner-freebsd-multimedia  Sun Jul 20 11:09:39 1997
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-multimedia>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id LAA27115
          for multimedia-outgoing; Sun, 20 Jul 1997 11:09:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sujal.prognet.com (sujal.prognet.com [204.255.154.231])
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id LAA27110
          for <freebsd-multimedia@FreeBSD.ORG>; Sun, 20 Jul 1997 11:09:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (smpatel@localhost)
          by sujal.prognet.com (8.8.4/8.8.4) with SMTP
	  id LAA12794; Sun, 20 Jul 1997 11:07:12 -0700 (PDT)
X-Authentication-Warning: sujal.prognet.com: smpatel owned process doing -bs
Date: Sun, 20 Jul 1997 11:07:12 -0700 (PDT)
From: Sujal Patel <smpatel@prognet.com>
To: Amancio Hasty <hasty@rah.star-gate.com>
cc: Luigi Rizzo <luigi@labinfo.iet.unipi.it>,
        Brian Campbell <brianc@pobox.com>, freebsd-multimedia@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject: Re: dma handling in the sound driver 
In-Reply-To: <199707201743.KAA04918@rah.star-gate.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.3.95.970720110614.12751B-100000@sujal.prognet.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-freebsd-multimedia@FreeBSD.ORG
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk


> I understand Luigi's position given that I had to dig into the
> code and understand it. Simplication of the dma code is a very
> important step towards having having a stable sound driver and
> for future support by others.

I Agree...  I've been through that code too, and if someone wants
to clean it up- God Bless them!! :-)


Sujal


> 
> >From The Desk Of Luigi Rizzo :
> > > On Sat, Jul 19, 1997 at 04:37:50PM +0200, Luigi Rizzo wrote:
> > > > I have planned to rewrite the dma buffer handling routines for
> > > > the sound driver as follows.
> > > 
> > > Why?
> > > 
> > > Is the current mechanism insufficient?  I thought changes were only
> > > requried for full-duplex operation.
> > > 
> > > There is a mechanism for setting the size and number of DMA buffers,
> > > is there not?  Will this be removed, or the settings simply ignored?
> > 
> > the main problem I have is that I find the dma code quite complex to
> > follow and understand (as all code which has been evolving for a long
> > time and adapting to new boards etc.). The scheme I have described is,
> > in my opinion, simpler and more effective with respect to latency.
> > 
> > Maybe it's just my problem but since I am doing the work I'll do it in
> > the way I find more effective.
> > 
> > Plus I'll document it !
> > 
> > 	Cheers
> > 	Luigi
> 
> 
> 
>