On 15 July 2012 18:21, Jon Elson <[email protected]> wrote: >> I am not privy to how the encoder module works internally, but it seems to >> me that if a timestamp could be put on the base thread sample > The software encoder component, Mesa encoder counters and the Pico Systems > UPC controller all can do this.
I just, on a whim looked at this. The software encoder contains: 382 /* increment main timestamp counter */ 383 timebase += period; 384 /* done */ Now, I might be wrong, and need to check tonight, but I have more than a sneaking suspicion that the "period" parameter passed to a realtime function isn't the actual time elapsed since last invocation, but is rather the rounded idealised value. So, if you have a thread period of the same order of magnitude as the thread dither, this might well introduce quite significant errors. I think that ideally the timestamps would be CPU clocks, but that would involve overhead. -- atp If you can't fix it, you don't own it. http://www.ifixit.com/Manifesto ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Live Security Virtual Conference Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ _______________________________________________ Emc-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
