From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: pl bossart Subject: Re: UCM questions Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2011 13:58:19 -0800 Message-ID: References: <20110121113744.GA18682@sirena.org.uk> <1295623491.3348.284.camel@odin> <1295957605.3322.89.camel@odin> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mail-iy0-f179.google.com (mail-iy0-f179.google.com [209.85.210.179]) by alsa0.perex.cz (Postfix) with ESMTP id 75296244EE for ; Tue, 25 Jan 2011 22:58:22 +0100 (CET) Received: by iye19 with SMTP id 19so6276253iye.38 for ; Tue, 25 Jan 2011 13:58:20 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <1295957605.3322.89.camel@odin> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: alsa-devel-bounces@alsa-project.org Errors-To: alsa-devel-bounces@alsa-project.org To: Liam Girdwood Cc: ALSA development , Mark Brown List-Id: alsa-devel@alsa-project.org >> Most of my questions are not really on the abstraction but really on >> how to handle devices that can be plugged or may not be active at all >> times. USB, HDMI, Wireless/remote displays fall in this category. So >> on top of the traditional local headset/speakers, I can either have a >> variety of devices that can be used for the same use case. It's still >> not clear to me if I would need to create a set of new verbs >> (hifi_usb, hifi_hdmi) or if I can stick to the existing verbs and add >> a modifier? > > You should stick to the existing verb and use a new device in most cases > above where your use case is the same but the output device is > different. ok, thanks for clarifying.