Subject: Re: [linux-audio-dev] Plugin APIs (again)
From: Steve Harris (S.W.Harris_AT_ecs.soton.ac.uk)
Date: Tue Dec 10 2002 - 19:00:54 EET
On Tue, Dec 10, 2002 at 05:06:29 +0100, Tim Goetze wrote:
> Steve Harris wrote:
>
> >On Tue, Dec 10, 2002 at 03:08:01 +0100, Tim Goetze wrote:
> >> it'd still be interesting to know how the sync problems this
> >> method poses are solved: you cannot rely on executable code
>
> >By sync problemt do you mean loop latency? There not solved exactly its
>
> nope, i meant dynamic updates on a realtime (lock-free)
> code path; it's an interesting problem with, afaict, no
> obviously elegant solutions.
Argh! I was thinking of dumping the code and rebuilding (hopefully keeping
the state). Doing it that way would be interesting, but much harder. Youd
have to either use a lot of function calls or do some hard code relocation
stuff I think.
> >As you know the latency is one sample you can do intersting tricks with
> >module placement and mixing.
>
> yeah, i agree it's the ideal method of processing. i'm not
> convinced it would run anywhere as fast as block-based
> processing though. cache effects are an argument (filter
No, I imagine it will be noticably slower, however I think CPU's are
getting to the kind of power where its feasable to use it for real.
The dynamic compiliation will win you some speed back.
I dont think the implementation is really that hard, the UI would be the
most complex part, as always. Its kindof a pipedream anyway, as none of us
has enough free time to tackle it at the moment.
- Steve
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Tue Dec 10 2002 - 19:04:55 EET