Re: VT6306 chip is for OHCI or UHCI?

> I got today a USB2.0/IEE1394 interface card probably Japanese local
> card, named IFC-PCI7IU2, which is claimed by the user interface to be
> VIA OHCI Compliant.   The card uses VT6306 and VT6212 chip.

And I bought USB sound device named HCMI-106, composed of only
one chip named CM106-F.

I have a serious problem how to set Adaptive USB Stream Out, or just reduse
that function to ordinal synchronous stream, say not 
desc 1.0 [9] 0x05: addr 0x06 attrib 0x09 maxpkt 768 interval 1ms [OUT] [Iso] [Adaptive]refresh 0
synchaddress 0
but just to
desc 1.0 [9] 0x05: addr 0x06 attrib 0x09 maxpkt 768 interval 1ms [OUT] [Iso] refresh 0 synchaddress 0

At last, no it doesn't work, just make a very short sound at once when
some sound data were put to /dev/audio.

If anyone has any comments on this result, please don't hesitate to mention
it.☺

Kenji

------------------------cut here-------------------------------
The Topology of the controls of this chip is as follows:

<<< Topology of Selector >>>

=======       -----------------
| Mic (4) |-->| agc volume R/L (8) |  ---+         -------------
=======       -----------------         |         |                           |

Re: VT6306 chip is for OHCI or UHCI?

After I summed-up the previous results, I noticed myself I may be doing
something very stupid.  Then, I set on the debug flag of the usb kernel,
and found the problem was not the endpoint is for Adaptive, but just on
the discrepacy of 2 channels or 8 channels.

The present debugging output of
term% usb/usbaudio -V -v 50 -d 0xf
was much improved, and I feel I may very close to the goal...

Anyway, revised results are as foloows, sorry evry one.

----------from here----------
term% usb/usbaudio -V -v 50 -d 0xf
pdesc 1.-1 [18]
desc 1.-1 [18] 0x01: usb (bcd)0110 class 0 subclass 0 proto 0 [0.0.0] max0 8 vendor 0xd8c product 0x6 device
(bcd)0010 man 0 prod 2 serial 0 nconfig 1
pdesc 1.0 [340]
desc 1.0 [9] 0x02: config 1: tdlen 340 ninterface 4 iconfig 0 attr 0xa0 power 500mA
desc 1.0 [9] 0x04: interface 0: alt 0 nept 0 class 0x1 subclass 0x1 proto 0 [audio.control.0] iinterface 0
desc 1.0 [10] 0x24: 1.1: Class-Specific AC Interface Header Descriptor
	AudioDeviceClass release (bcd)0100, TotalLength 187, InCollection 2 aInterfaceNr1 1, aInterfaceNr2 2

desc 1.0 [12] 0x24: 1.1: Audio Input Terminal Descriptor
	bTerminalId 1, wTerminalType 0x101 (USB Streaming), bAssocTerminal 0 bNrChannels 8, wChannelConfig
0x63f, iChannelNames 0 iTerminal 0
Audio output unit 1

desc 1.0 [12] 0x24: 1.1: Audio Input Terminal Descriptor
	bTerminalId 4, wTerminalType 0x201 (Microphone), bAssocTerminal 0 bNrChannels 2, wChannelConfig
0x3, iChannelNames 0 iTerminal 0

Re: Advances in software technology

In article <6ffc831da45dcc04aa2839da7c75d259 <at> davidashen.net>,
 <9fans <at> cse.psu.edu> wrote:
>> I note from the article on the USACO programming contest in the
>> current Usenix magazine that one of chaps has written an implementation
>> of vi (the editor, not the mips simulator) in perl.
>> 
>> This is great news, as vi can now much more easily be ported
>> to other operating systems.
>
>A much more usable solution would be to just implement BSD C library,
>termcap, system calls and a C compiler in perl, so that anyone who needs 
>vi could just run perl and compile and run BSD vi on top of it. nvi is a good
>program, after all.

Somebody was working on a rewrite of all the posix shell level tools in
perl, "in order to make them more portable" or some such drivel.  The
people in this world with too much time on their hands should be using it
on something really useful, instead!
--

-- 
Aharon (Arnold) Robbins --- Pioneer Consulting Ltd.	arnold AT skeeve DOT com
P.O. Box 354		Home Phone: +972  8 979-0381	Fax: +1 206 350 8765
Nof Ayalon		Cell Phone: +972 50  729-7545
D.N. Shimshon 99785	ISRAEL

UN to fund linux for the 3rd world

i heard this soundbite on the BBC.  hmm ...
--
MGRS 31U DQ 52572 12604

Re: UN to fund linux for the 3rd world

On Wed, 1 Sep 2004 16:48:55 +0200, boyd, rounin <boyd <at> insultant.net> wrote:
> i heard this soundbite on the BBC.  hmm ...

Though Linux may not have been the best choice, I'm not against it.

Software has become part of the infrastructure of most of the
governments of the world, and the thought of having that software
under such majority control by a single vendor (any single vendor, not
just the current one) is a pretty scary thought.

Helping destitute nations become self-supportive is a good thing, and
I think open source, royalty- and license-fee-free software is a good
foundation for building an infrastructure.

-Jack

If Excel is the #1 most-used spreadsheet in the world, which is #3?

Re: UN to fund linux for the 3rd world

> Helping destitute nations become self-supportive is a good thing, and
> I think open source, royalty- and license-fee-free software is a good
> foundation for building an infrastructure.

oh i agree, but plan 9 would have been the right choice.

they're still getting 20 year old junk after all.

Re: UN to fund linux for the 3rd world

> > Helping destitute nations become self-supportive is a good thing, and
> > I think open source, royalty- and license-fee-free software is a good
> > foundation for building an infrastructure.
>
> oh i agree, but plan 9 would have been the right choice.

You're saying that plan 9 in its current state is the best choice for end
users in govt, business and personal use in third world countries?  Plan 9
is a great system by programmers for programmers, but it is hardly ready
for prime time.  Choosing linux, on the other hand, gives them something
that they can use right now.

> they're still getting 20 year old junk after all.

Linux has a lot of features in it that werent around in 1984.

Tim N.

Re: UN to fund linux for the 3rd world

> Choosing linux, on the other hand, gives them something
> that they can use right now.

once they've configured the DNS & sendmail for starters ...

Re: UN to fund linux for the 3rd world

ah, but the UN is used to never-ending combat zones

> Choosing linux, on the other hand, gives them something
> that they can use right now.

once they've configured the DNS & sendmail for starters ...

Re: UN to fund linux for the 3rd world

C H Forsyth <forsyth <at> vitanuova.com> writes:
> ah, but the UN is used to never-ending combat zones

Hey!  Oh, wait...nevermind.

Seriously, though, I can understand why they might not be in a hurry
to push something like Plan 9, but (a) if this is funding new development,
why not pick a technically superior platform?  (b) why Linux?  Why not
one of the BSD distributions?  (c) Can't technology win just this once?

	- Dan C.