Arun Raghavan

Extremely pithy tagline here

As I’d blogged about last week, we had a couple of Audio BoF sessions last week. Here’s a summary of what was discussed. I’ve collected items in relevance order rather than chronological order to make for easier reading. I think I have everything covered, I’ll update this post if one of the attendees points out something I missed or got wrong.

  • Surround: There were a number of topics that came up with regards to multichannel/surround support:

    • There seems to be some lack of uniformity of channel maps, particularly in non-HDA hardware. While it was agreed that this should be fixed, we need some directed testing and bug reports to actually be able to fix this.

    • Multichannel mixers, while theoretically supported, are not actually exposed by any current drivers. It was suggested that these could be exposed without breaking existing applications by having new MC mixers exposed with device names corresponding to the surround PCM device (like “surround51″).

    • We need a way to query channel maps on a given PCM. This will be implemented as a new ALSA API which could be called after the PCM is opened. (AI: Takashi)

    • It would be good to have a way to configure the channel map as well (if supported by the hardware?). The suggestion was to do this as was done in PulseAudio, where an arbitrary channel map could be specified. (NB: is there hardware that supports multiple/arbitrary channel maps? If yes, how do we handle this?)

  • Routing: Unsurprisingly, we came back to the problem of building a simplified mixer graph for PulseAudio.

    • The current status is that ALSA builds a simplified mixer for use by userspace, and PulseAudio further simplifies this by means of some name-based guessing.

    • PulseAudio would ideally like a simplified version of the original mixer graph, but something more complete than what we get now

    • However, since PulseAudio has fairly unique requirements of what information it wants, it probably makes sense to have ALSA provide the entire graph and leave the simplification task to PulseAudio (discussion on this approach continues)

    • There was no consensus on who would do this or how this should be done (creating a new serialisation format, exposing what HDA provides, adding node metadata to ALSA mixer controls, or something else altogether)

    • As an interim step, it was agreed that it would be possible to provide ordering in the simplified ALSA mixer (that is, add metadata to the control to signal what control comes “before” it and what comes “after” it). This should go some way in making the PA mixer simplification logic simpler and more robust. (AI: Takashi)

  • HDMI: A couple of things came up in discussion about the status of HDMI.

    • There was a question about the reliability of ELD information as this will be used more in future versions of PulseAudio. There did not appear to be conclusive evidence in either direction, so we will probably assume that it is reliable and deal with reliability problems as they arise.

    • It was mentioned that it might be desirable to only expose the ALSA device if a receiver is plugged in. This had been mooted earlier as something to do in PulseAudio as an alternative. One thing to consider with this approach is dealing with a device switch on the receiver side. Doing this without a notification to userspace was generally agreed to be a bad idea.

  • Jack detection: The long-standing debate on exposing jacks as input devices or ALSA controls came to a conclusion, with the resolution being that jacks would be exposed as ALSA controls. This requires a change in the kernel (and potentially alsa-lib?) which should not be too complex. Actual buttons (such as volume/mute control) will continue to be input devices. Once this is done, the pending jack detection patches will be adapted to use the new interface. (AI: Takashi (patches are in a branch already!), David)

  • UCM: Another long-standing issue was the merging of the ALSA UCM patches into PulseAudio. Most of the problems thus far had been due to an incomplete understanding of how ALSA and PA concepts mapped to each other. Some consensus was arrived at in this regard after a lengthy discussion:

    • As is the case now, every ALSA PCM maps to a PA sink

    • Each UCM verb maps to a PA card profile

    • Each combination of UCM devices that can be used concurrently maps to a PA port

    • Each UCM modifier is mapped to an intended role on the corresponding sink

    The code should (as is in the patches currently submitted) be part of the PA ALSA module, and there will be changes required to use the UCM-specified mixer list instead of PA’s guessing mechanism. (AI: ???)

    (NB: It was mentioned that PulseAudio needs to support multiple intended roles for a sink/source. This is actually already supported — the intended roles property is a whitespace-separated list of roles)

    (NB2: There was further discussion with the Linaro folks this week about the UCM bits, and there’s likely going to be an IRC/phone gathering to clarify things further in the near future)

  • GStreamer latency settings: We currently do not actually use PulseAudio’s power saving features from GStreamer for several reasons. Suggestions to over come this were mooted. While no definite agreement was reached, one suggestion was to add a “powersave” profile to pulsesink that chose higher latency/buffer-time values. Players would need to set this if they are not using features that break when these values are raised.

  • Corking: The statelessness of current the corking mechanism was discussed in one session, and between the PulseAudio developers later. The problem is that we need to be able to track cork/uncork reasons more closely. This would give us more metadata that is needed to make policy decisions without breaking streams. Particularly, for example, if PA corks a music stream due to an incoming call, then the user plays, then pauses music, and then the call ends, we must not uncork the music stream. We intend to deal with this with two changes:

    • We need to add a per-cause cork/uncork request count

    • We need to associate a “generation” with cork/uncork requests, so certain conditions (such as user intervention) can bump the generation counter, and uncork requests corresponding to old cork requests will be ignored

    This will make it possible to track the various bits of state we need to do the right thing for cases like the one mentioned before.

So that’s that — lots of things discussed, lots of things to do! Thanks to everyone who came for participating.

There are no comments.

Leave a Reply

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>