Subject: RE: [linux-audio-dev] Re: A Plugin API
From: Richard W.E. Furse (richard_AT_muse.demon.co.uk)
Date: ke maalis 01 2000 - 15:03:12 EST
From: Benno Senoner [SMTP:sbenno_AT_gardena.net]
>Richard,
>I disagree with the idea of not allowing input buffer = output buffer,
>since as other pointed out we will waste TONS of memory bandwidth.
[...]
>As for your flow order concerns: I think we have to implement both
methods:
>one allowing input and output buffer sharing, and the other
>which prohibits this explicitly allowing to connect more than one plugin
>to this output buffer, so that you can avoid data copying.
>In this case you will use the input buffer != output buffer method only
[...]
I'm not suggesting we disallow input buffer = output buffer, I'm suggesting
we disallow a port being both an input and an output as this can make life
difficult for the host. It's perfectly possible to connect the same buffer
to both the input and the output ports on the same plugin, but I'd like
this to the host's decision, not the plugin's. This was made explicit (with
an exception for pathological cases) in a recent addition to the header
file that you hopefully have received. I believe this is logically similar
to what you are suggesting in your second paragraph although the
implementation is a little simpler as many real-world plugins will not need
separate code to handle the two different cases.
I hope this does what you want.
Best wishes,
-- Richard
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : pe maalis 10 2000 - 07:23:28 EST