Ticket #146 (new feature)

Opened 11 years ago

Last modified 7 years ago

saffire LE mixer: follow monitor dial

Reported by: ppalmers Assigned to:
Priority: waiting for device info Milestone: Indeterminant (need device info)
Component: Version: FFADO 2.0-beta6 (1.999.36)
Keywords: Cc:
The device the bug applies to:

Description

implement front panel monitor dial following by GUI for the saffire LE

Change History

10/21/08 13:14:03 changed by ppalmers

  • milestone changed from FFADO 2.0 to FFADO 2.1.

I need more information for this.

03/28/12 03:56:35 changed by jwoithe

Is it fair to close this? It seems like more information is required and that this information is not forthcoming in a timely fashion.

(follow-up: ↓ 4 ) 06/03/12 05:39:43 changed by jwoithe

  • priority changed from minor to waiting for device info.
  • milestone changed from FFADO 2.1 to Indeterminant (need device info).

It appears that more device information is required to progress this ticket. I'll change the priority and milestone to reflect this.

(in reply to: ↑ 3 ; follow-up: ↓ 5 ) 01/10/13 14:31:16 changed by ahellquist

I am waiting for a regular saffire (the one before LE) and will be happy to provide information re. the dials on the front panel. Is the Saffire and Saffire LE too different for me to give any help ?

Replying to jwoithe:

It appears that more device information is required to progress this ticket. I'll change the priority and milestone to reflect this.

(in reply to: ↑ 4 ; follow-up: ↓ 7 ) 01/10/13 14:57:41 changed by jwoithe

Replying to ahellquist:

I am waiting for a regular saffire (the one before LE) and will be happy to provide information re. the dials on the front panel. Is the Saffire and Saffire LE too different for me to give any help ?

To be honest I'm not sure. Phil is across many of the Saffire devices and he might be able to provide some feedback. These tickets go to the ffado-devel mailing list so I expect he'll pick up the existance of this conversation from there.

Phil: if possible, when replying (assuming you have a reply to make :-) ) use the trac ticket interface rather than a reply to the mailing ist so the reply gets automatically associated with the ticket record.

01/11/13 01:12:50 changed by stefanr

Both the original Saffire and the Saffire LE are BeBoB based, but I don't know what possible differences regarding chip revision or features or firmware relevant to this ticket might exist.

(in reply to: ↑ 5 ; follow-up: ↓ 8 ) 01/11/13 11:20:30 changed by la-page-web-of-phil

Replying to jwoithe:

Replying to ahellquist:

I am waiting for a regular saffire (the one before LE) and will be happy to provide information re. the dials on the front panel. Is the Saffire and Saffire LE too different for me to give any help ?

To be honest I'm not sure. Phil is across many of the Saffire devices and he might be able to provide some feedback. These tickets go to the ffado-devel mailing list so I expect he'll pick up the existance of this conversation from there.

Sorry, I have even not any basic knowledge about this class of Saffire which are bebob based device. Just having a rapid look to the code, it looks like very specific and requiring a lot of information and almost probably a device for testing. Now, it was hard to distinguish the differences between the two devices.

Phil: if possible, when replying (assuming you have a reply to make :-) ) use the trac ticket interface rather than a reply to the mailing ist so the reply gets automatically associated with the ticket record.

I followed the recommendation, didn't I :-) ?

(in reply to: ↑ 7 ) 01/11/13 22:38:22 changed by jwoithe

Replying to la-page-web-of-phil:

Sorry, I have even not any basic knowledge about this class of Saffire which are bebob based device.

Ah yes. I keep forgetting that the early Saffires were quite different to the later ones.

Just having a rapid look to the code, it looks like very specific and requiring a lot of information and almost probably a device for testing. Now, it was hard to distinguish the differences between the two devices.

For sure. Given that these early Saffires are based on a totally different architecture to the new ones, it's true that anyone attempting to look into this ticket is going to need a device themselves in order to test things. Debugging anything beyond trivial issues remotely is very time consuming and potentially frustrating.

I followed the recommendation, didn't I :-) ?

Perfectly. :-)

Re-reading the original ticket, it seems it refers to the effect of making changes using the front panel controls while the ffado-mixer GUI is active: the intent is to have the GUI update itself to reflect the status as set by the hardware controls. This is as much about the communication protocol as it is with the device's physical appearance. To this end, the first thing required would be an understanding of how the device communicates front panel action to the software. Since this is almost certainly sent using async packets, sniffing using a PCILynx card is probably the only way to determine this, short of the unlikely event of obtaining documentation from the manufacturer.

To summarise, if my understanding is correct the details required at this stage involve the communication of information from the device's hardware controls to FFADO.

To ahellquist: does this sound like something you could look into? My reading of your post is that you're referring more to the identification of the physical controls available. While explicitly documenting these may be useful for future reference, I don't think this by itself is sufficient to progress this ticket.

To anyone: please correct me if I'm totally wrong about any of this.