Subject: RE: [linux-audio-dev] Re: A Plugin API
From: David Olofson (david_AT_gardena.net)
Date: to maalis 02 2000 - 17:24:08 EST
On Wed, 01 Mar 2000, Benno Senoner wrote:
> 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.
>
> I hate ping-pong memory copying, and when running 10-50 plugins
> simultaneously, we will deliver much worse performance than other
> plugin APIs.
Yes, I'm afraid this is true...
Also, while I'm at it, I think plugins should an additional flag
LADSPA_PROPERTY_OUTPUT_LEVEL, and some convention that allows the
host to know which control inputs affect this output mix level. It
could be supported on a plugin that doesn't support *in == *out. It
should also be in the API definition that this output level control
is to be linear.
Now, should this be expanded to supporting an individual output level
control for each output? I suppose that would make this optimization
possibility more useful in real life...
If it's unclear; the idea is to eliminate the extra copy + extra
mixer plugin needed when mixing the output from multiple plugins onto
a single/the last bus.
//David
.- M u C o S --------------------------------. .- David Olofson ------.
| A Free/Open Multimedia | | Audio Hacker |
| Plugin and Integration Standard | | Linux Advocate |
`------------> http://www.linuxdj.com/mucos -' | Open Source Advocate |
.- A u d i a l i t y ------------------------. | Singer |
| Rock Solid Low Latency Signal Processing | | Songwriter |
`---> http://www.angelfire.com/or/audiality -' `-> david_AT_linuxdj.com -'
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : pe maalis 10 2000 - 07:23:28 EST