[pulseaudio-discuss] RFC: Routing and Priority lists

[Colin Guthrie]

'Twas brillig, and Maarten Bosmans at 15/11/11 10:52 did gyre and gimble:
> 2011/11/13 Colin Guthrie <gmane at colin.guthr.ie>:
>> I've written up my latest proposal to gather feedback before starting
>> (hopefully soon now) on the implementation.
>> http://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/PulseAudio/RFC/PriorityRouting
> 
> Would the pa_route and PA_CORE_HOOK_SINK_INPUT_ROUTE stuff from your
> proposed implementation be used directly by some modules, or would all
> interaction with the route decision code go through priority lists?

I would expect most uses cases to go via the wrapped up priority lists,
but I didn't want to limit the use cases. This was a general suggestion
from Lennart when we discussed it in Prague. Modules could be written to
do routing based on other info on other platforms potentially too.

> I think it would perhaps be clearer if there was some separation in
> pa_route_decision_t between the stuff that can be used to make the
> decision (direction, proplist, ignore) and the result of the decision
> (device).

How do you suggest this is done? Just in how the struct is laid
out/commented or something more proactive?


Col


-- 

Colin Guthrie
gmane(at)colin.guthr.ie
http://colin.guthr.ie/

Day Job:
  Tribalogic Limited http://www.tribalogic.net/
Open Source:
  Mageia Contributor http://www.mageia.org/
  PulseAudio Hacker http://www.pulseaudio.org/
  Trac Hacker http://trac.edgewall.org/