[pulseaudio-discuss] [PATCH v13 10/10] bluetooth: policy: Treat bi-directional A2DP profiles as suitable for VOIP
tanuk at iki.fi
Thu Oct 17 13:11:26 UTC 2019
On Thu, 2019-10-17 at 14:55 +0200, Pali Rohár wrote:
> On Thursday 17 October 2019 15:52:00 Tanu Kaskinen wrote:
> > On Tue, 2019-10-08 at 18:29 +0200, Pali Rohár wrote:
> > > Automatic SBC profile is not going to be changed. It is there to support
> > > all devices without any tweaks. ValdikSS already did more tests and
> > > there are devices which do not work with higher SBC bitpool. So
> > > increasing max value of bitpool in Automatic SBC profile would lead to
> > > broken support for these devices and therefore regressions.
> > >
> > > As Automatic SBC profile is the only one available for systems where
> > > codec switching is not supported, it would mean complete regression as
> > > these devices completely stops working on those systems.
> > >
> > > Upgrading either pulseaudio or bluez must not lead to problem that some
> > > bluetooth devices stop working (if they worked before upgrade).
> > >
> > > So no, there would not be any changes in Automatic SBC profile. This one
> > > should stay untouched, to make it always working with all existing
> > > devices without any regression.
> > I wasn't aware that advertising the XQ settings during negotiation
> > breaks some devices. I guess this means that JP Guillaume's SBC XQ
> > patch can't be accepted, assuming that we value avoiding regressions
> > more than the improved quality for most headsets?
> In this patch series I'm reworking and proposing also XQ profiles at
> separate endpoints. So in case XQ is broken for paricular device, with
> codec switching API, user would be able to switch back to automatic SBC
> profile (on different SEP) which should stay as it is in current
> version, which is working with all devices.
Yes, but what about JP Guillaume's patch, which is a simple way of
achieving XQ support before your patches have been accepted? I planned
to review it first (because he asked), but now it looks like that may
not be a good idea (I don't want regressions).
> > Here's that patch:
> > https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/pulseaudio/pulseaudio/merge_requests/177
More information about the pulseaudio-discuss