Re: Kernel OSS vs ALSA

Alan Cox (alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk)
Thu, 14 Oct 1999 12:43:50 +0100 (BST)


> Here's the laundry list of requests:
> * support for any arbitrary mixer device: name, desc, data types, number
> of subchannels

This tends to turn into a very messy API - thats perhaps one big ALSA problem.
You need a lot of code to implement the mixer and also a lot of code to show
a good conceptual map of the mixer for a configuration tool

> * 3D audio, maybe in userspace

Some chips do bits of this in hardware - the ESS Maestro has delay line modes
for example so you can do delay shifting to model objects at a distance and
echoes in hardware. The newest cards have some of the 3D modelling in
hardware.

> * simultaneous multiple streams, with mixing as needed

Exposing the streams is already handled by OSS (ok we might want the odd
extra major)

> * time marking of streams for synchronization

Yep.

> * OSS exposes internals, there should to be a mid-layer lib in userspace

Which internals ?

> * some control over bass boost and the like

That is easy to add to OSS. The 3D spacialiser was added recently, stuff
like Bass boost isnt a problem.

It is on the synth side that ALSA is way better.

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/