Re: [linux-audio-dev] snapshot of laaga implementation

New Message Reply About this list Date view Thread view Subject view Author view Other groups

Subject: Re: [linux-audio-dev] snapshot of laaga implementation
From: Abramo Bagnara (abramo_AT_alsa-project.org)
Date: Tue Jun 12 2001 - 19:27:50 EEST


Paul Davis wrote:
>
> >- read/write is probably faster (less cycles in kernel). I'm not sure
> >however and I doubt the difference is relevant anyway.
>
> kill is faster. documented on a kernel syscall measurement website
> recently. mostly because you don't have to descend through VFS ...

Very interesting... can you send me an URL?

Note that however the total cost is not simply kill, it's:
read+write
vs.
kill+signal deliver+handler

However as I've said hardly difference is relevant.

> >It's difficult to see in the future, this is my point.
>
> I agree with you. However, there are some aspects of the future over
> which we have control. My name in the future will continue to be Paul
> Davis, and I will continue to write audio software till i fall over
> and die :) I'm merely proposing that we constrain the "properties" to
> 2 (max buffer size for the client and the sample rate). I'm not trying
> to read the future, I'm trying to constrain it :)

My experience with ALSA has shown me many times that this is a wrong
approach. One of the few things I'd change in current ALSA API is
exactly that (generic properties and property read/write transaction
concept).

This *simplifies* the API while retaining maximum
flexybility/extensibility.

-- 
Abramo Bagnara                       mailto:abramo_AT_alsa-project.org

Opera Unica Phone: +39.546.656023 Via Emilia Interna, 140 48014 Castel Bolognese (RA) - Italy

ALSA project http://www.alsa-project.org It sounds good!


New Message Reply About this list Date view Thread view Subject view Author view Other groups

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Tue Jun 12 2001 - 20:45:30 EEST