Michael, Paul has answered you on jack-devel. See below.
Note: I'm cross-posting this mail to linux-audio-dev, since Michael has recently
subscribed to it. At least, we should be able to discuss together in there.
Paul Davis wrote :
> I have no idea how any of you have kept this conversation going when one
> of the main protagonists is not even subscribed to one of the two
> mailing lists, and i suspect that one of the others isn't subscribed to
> the other. perhaps the FFmpeg-devel list doesn't require membership.
>
> anyway, i've finally had enough of reading Michael's stuff about
> buffers, timing and so forth and felt obligated to comment.
>
> michael - i would politely request that you stop shooting off at the
> mouth about stuff that the JACK community has been dealing with for more
> than 9 years.
>
> you do not need to write your own ring buffer code - JACK's is LGPL'ed
> and you are free (and probably even recommended) to copy it.
> furthermore, you would be very foolish to imagine (especially based on
> your incredibly naive comments about uint8_t) that you understand the
> subtleties of these buffers. the JACK community (and a couple of other
> exclusively audio-focused development groups) have been working with
> this buffer design for many, many years, and we are absolutely confident
> that our buffers are (a) SMP/multi-core safe (b) as efficient as they
> can be without using assembler. you should also be aware that there are
> very good arguments for the current structure of the ringbuffer code,
> which explicitly does NOT use any memory barriers. if you don't
> understand why it works without them, then you should probably refrain
> from commenting on the design of these buffers at all.
>
>
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev@email-addr-hidden
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
Received on Sun Mar 8 04:15:01 2009
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Sun Mar 08 2009 - 04:15:01 EET