Subject: Re: [linux-audio-dev] Linux Alsa Audio over 1394 - a Thesis
From: Paul Davis (paul_AT_linuxaudiosystems.com)
Date: Wed Feb 26 2003 - 16:05:05 EET
>Well, I'll shut up about it. I still think it is a mistake. I haven't heard
i don't want you to shut about it. its a very important design
decision.
>any
>convincing (to me) arguments why an application should not handle variable
>sized callbacks. VST process() is variable size I think as are EASI xfer
>callbacks, but clearly JACK needs constant callbacks and there is nothing
>I can do about that...
as i understand it, VST is only variable to allow for automation. And
if you follow the discussion here about XAP and elsewhere about PTAF,
you will see that many people consider this a mistake that comes from
not using "events" in the correct way.
i feel that it should be the job of ALSA to handle period sizes. if it
doesn't do a good job, it should be fixed. if we ask for a wakeup
every time 1024 frames are available, and the interrupts occur at 420,
840 and 1260 frames, then we should be woken up on the third
interrupt, process 1024 frames of data, and go back to sleep. the h/w
driver should handle this, not JACK. the latency behaviour will be
just as requested by the user.
--p
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Wed Feb 26 2003 - 15:56:35 EET