Re: [linux-audio-dev] BruteFIR + jack = crackling noise?

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

Subject: Re: [linux-audio-dev] BruteFIR + jack = crackling noise?
From: Martijn Sipkema (msipkema_AT_sipkema-digital.com)
Date: Mon Feb 24 2003 - 19:03:58 EET


[...]
> > Perhaps you would reconsider having JACK use constant (frames)
> > callbacks?
>
> I think a better solution might be to buffer up enough samples so that
> jackd can provide a constant number of frames.

I don't think that is a better solution. JACK should be close to the
hardware and deliver what the hardware is capable of. If a client needs
constant (frames) period, it can do the buffering itself.

The buffering adds latency and complexity. I thought the idea of the
callback based API was that the client has to process the data
available when it is available. For some hardware this might be
constant and for other it is not. As long as the time to process is
roughly the same as the time the callback represents high cpu load
should be possible.

I'm not convinced that because of easier block processing in the
clients support for common hardware should suffer.

--ms


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

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Mon Feb 24 2003 - 19:08:59 EET