[pulseaudio-discuss] [PATCH v1 0/3] bluetooth: Headset port availability

[Luiz Augusto von Dentz]

Hi David,

On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 12:14 PM, David Henningsson
<david.henningsson at canonical.com> wrote:
> On 11/27/2012 02:35 PM, Luiz Augusto von Dentz wrote:
>>
>> Hi Mikel,
>>
>> On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 9:12 AM, Mikel Astiz <mikel.astiz.oss at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Luiz,
>>>
>>> On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 9:17 PM, Luiz Augusto von Dentz
>>> <luiz.dentz at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi Mikel,
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 7:32 PM, Mikel Astiz <mikel.astiz.oss at gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> From: Mikel Astiz <mikel.astiz at bmw-carit.de>
>>>>>
>>>>> This patchset extends the previous patch (resent unmodified here) with
>>>>> the policy change suggested by Tanu.
>>>>>
>>>>> It seems no conclusion was reached about the names etc. but I believe
>>>>> this is the best alternative without the form factor and in any case the
>>>>> strings can easily be changed during/after pushing.
>>>>>
>>>>> Mikel Astiz (3):
>>>>>    bluetooth: Merge headset ports into one
>>>>>    bluetooth: Disable profile auto-switch policy for headsets
>>>>>    conf: Load bluetooth-policy module by default
>>>>>
>>>>>   src/daemon/default.pa.in                        |  4 ++
>>>>>   src/modules/bluetooth/module-bluetooth-device.c | 72
>>>>> ++++++++++++++++++-------
>>>>>   src/modules/bluetooth/module-bluetooth-policy.c |  4 ++
>>>>>   3 files changed, 60 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-)
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> 1.7.11.7
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I would like to see some good reasoning to do these changes, how we
>>>
>>>
>>> There was a long IRC discussion about this and the conclusion was that
>>> introducing independent ports for A2DP and HSP/HFP headsets was a
>>> regression (as first pointed out in [1]). There was no general
>>> consensus but this seems the most strict interpretation of a port,
>>> which represents a physical device no matter the underlying protocols.
>>
>>
>> Im not sure I follow, my interpretation was that the ports were per
>> sinks/sources just as the sinks and sources are per profiles
>
>
> This is no longer true - e g, on the ALSA side we have (since 1.0 or 2.0,
> don't remember) shared ports for different profiles, e g, the "Analog
> Output" port can be used with both a "Stereo" and a "5.1 Surround" profile.

Still don't see the problem, why we cannot have multiple output ports
per card? Or this is because they show up/are selectable in the Output
tab, because that I would assume is a bug and only ports which belongs
to the active profile should be listed there.


--
Luiz Augusto von Dentz