Re: [pulseaudio-discuss] Buffering attributes with variable format
'Twas brillig, and Felipe Contreras at 05/11/11 15:25 did gyre and gimble: On Tue, Oct 11, 2011 at 8:59 AM, Arun Raghavan arun.ragha...@collabora.co.uk wrote: On Mon, 2011-10-10 at 22:28 +0300, Rémi Denis-Courmont wrote: Le lundi 10 octobre 2011 21:31:30 Pierre-Louis Bossart, vous avez écrit : I don't have time to waste for threads like these. Oh yeah. Sorry that I spend much of the free time I had in the past few months fixing our code (good), adapting to PulseAudio new requirements (not very good) or working around PulseAudio limitations (bad). But you are right. Intel OTC is surely not paying you to care about mere hobbyists. Let them fuck off. Thanks a lot. None of that gives you the right to be rude and uncivil, so please drop the abrasive attitude and personal remarks. He has the *right* to be that way. Other communities like LKML have no problem with that. People should focus on what is being said, not how it's being said. No one has the right to be uncivil and a friendly reminder of that is all it takes to have the kind of ecosystem and community *we* want. I don't give a crap how LKML or other communities do it, that is totally irrelevant. And what we certainly don't want is people dragging up month old threads when there really is no need to do so other than to cause trouble and generally create bad feeling. I really do not understand the logic of this, but please do not do it again. I don't like taking action against people who continually disrupt the community, but I will still take that action when it's warranted. And for the record, while Remi can be prone to the occasional over-reaction at times, I certainly don't consider him to be guilty of this generally - he posts questions, answers and interacts with people and helps out on IRC and is in all other respects a valuable participant in this community. The posts from yourself only seem to be about causing general unrest in the community and do not even have anything to do with the topic pulseaudio or linux audio in general. So I'm asking nicely for you to please back off unless you have a question or discussion point related to audio, and that includes further replies to this or the reply-to thread. Thank you. Col -- Colin Guthrie gmane(at)colin.guthr.ie http://colin.guthr.ie/ Day Job: Tribalogic Limited http://www.tribalogic.net/ Open Source: Mageia Contributor http://www.mageia.org/ PulseAudio Hacker http://www.pulseaudio.org/ Trac Hacker http://trac.edgewall.org/ ___ pulseaudio-discuss mailing list pulseaudio-discuss@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/pulseaudio-discuss
Re: [pulseaudio-discuss] Buffering attributes with variable format
On Mon, 2011-11-07 at 19:49 +0200, Felipe Contreras wrote: Once you have such guidelines Arun could say Being rude and uncivil goes against this mailing list guidelines, so please drop the abrasive attitude and personal remarks., and perhaps share a link to those guidelines. Here's one example: https://live.gnome.org/CodeOfConduct I'd be in favor of writing down a code of conduct document, since there seems to be some need for one. I think Gnome's code of conduct would fit Pulseaudio fine too, so we could basically just copy that text. I believe I've made my point clear that other people don't agree with you that tone should be important in discussions, so if nobody replies here, I won't either. As for the reply-to thread, I want to leave something clear, so I will make one final comment, and again, if nobody replies, leave it there. Anyway, I don't see why you stress so much about normal discussion about communication methods. The impression that I got from your previous mail in this thread was that you were advocating for a anything goes policy. Maybe that helps you see why you got the response that you did. Thanks for the constructive mail :) -- Tanu ___ pulseaudio-discuss mailing list pulseaudio-discuss@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/pulseaudio-discuss
Re: [pulseaudio-discuss] Buffering attributes with variable format
Whether passing multiple format infos to negotiate digital passthrough, or setting one of the PA_STREAM_FIX_* flags on a record stream, I'm a bit puzzled how the buffering attributes are supposed to work. Most of the values are expressed in bytes. How should the application negotiate certain timings then? The mapping of bytes to microseconds depends on the bitrate, which is not known to the application until after PulseAudio chooses the exact stream format and returns it. Actually there's no variable format. With the IEC61937 format, the compressed frames are padded with zeroes to reach the same bitrate as 2ch, 16-bit PCM. In short if you have AC3 at 48kHz, PulseAudio will handle 1,536 Mbits/s. You can set the buffering as if it was a PCM stream. I would recommend you set -1 to all the fields and let PulseAudio select the best buffering for low-power. -Pierre ___ pulseaudio-discuss mailing list pulseaudio-discuss@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/pulseaudio-discuss
Re: [pulseaudio-discuss] Buffering attributes with variable format
Le lundi 10 octobre 2011 18:35:02 Pierre-Louis Bossart, vous avez écrit : Whether passing multiple format infos to negotiate digital passthrough, or setting one of the PA_STREAM_FIX_* flags on a record stream, I'm a bit puzzled how the buffering attributes are supposed to work. Most of the values are expressed in bytes. How should the application negotiate certain timings then? The mapping of bytes to microseconds depends on the bitrate, which is not known to the application until after PulseAudio chooses the exact stream format and returns it. Actually there's no variable format. Yeah? I never said there were formats with variable bit rate. I said I don't know the format, hence the bit rate, until after the buffer attributes have already been transmitted. With the IEC61937 format, the compressed frames are padded with zeroes to reach the same bitrate as 2ch, 16-bit PCM. In short if you have AC3 at 48kHz, PulseAudio will handle 1,536 Mbits/s. You can set the buffering as if it was a PCM stream. I would recommend you set -1 to all the fields and let PulseAudio select the best buffering for low-power. This is only an option if there are no latency constraints. -- Rémi Denis-Courmont http://www.remlab.net/ http://fi.linkedin.com/in/remidenis ___ pulseaudio-discuss mailing list pulseaudio-discuss@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/pulseaudio-discuss
Re: [pulseaudio-discuss] Buffering attributes with variable format
On Mon, 2011-10-10 at 19:24 +0300, Rémi Denis-Courmont wrote: Le lundi 10 octobre 2011 18:35:02 Pierre-Louis Bossart, vous avez écrit : Whether passing multiple format infos to negotiate digital passthrough, or setting one of the PA_STREAM_FIX_* flags on a record stream, I'm a bit puzzled how the buffering attributes are supposed to work. Most of the values are expressed in bytes. How should the application negotiate certain timings then? The mapping of bytes to microseconds depends on the bitrate, which is not known to the application until after PulseAudio chooses the exact stream format and returns it. Actually there's no variable format. Yeah? I never said there were formats with variable bit rate. I said I don't know the format, hence the bit rate, until after the buffer attributes have already been transmitted. With the IEC61937 format, the compressed frames are padded with zeroes to reach the same bitrate as 2ch, 16-bit PCM. In short if you have AC3 at 48kHz, PulseAudio will handle 1,536 Mbits/s. You can set the buffering as if it was a PCM stream. I would recommend you set -1 to all the fields and let PulseAudio select the best buffering for low-power. This is only an option if there are no latency constraints. You could pick the most conservative of your formats and then adjust after connecting using pa_stream_set_buffer_attr(). To do this the right way, we'd need to change how stream setup is done to have an intermediate stage and it's quite a large change for benefits that don't seem to be worth the cost. -- Arun ___ pulseaudio-discuss mailing list pulseaudio-discuss@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/pulseaudio-discuss
Re: [pulseaudio-discuss] Buffering attributes with variable format
Le lundi 10 octobre 2011 21:31:30 Pierre-Louis Bossart, vous avez écrit : I don't have time to waste for threads like these. Oh yeah. Sorry that I spend much of the free time I had in the past few months fixing our code (good), adapting to PulseAudio new requirements (not very good) or working around PulseAudio limitations (bad). But you are right. Intel OTC is surely not paying you to care about mere hobbyists. Let them fuck off. Thanks a lot. -- Rémi Denis-Courmont http://www.remlab.net/ http://fi.linkedin.com/in/remidenis ___ pulseaudio-discuss mailing list pulseaudio-discuss@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/pulseaudio-discuss
Re: [pulseaudio-discuss] Buffering attributes with variable format
Le lundi 10 octobre 2011 19:57:03 Arun Raghavan, vous avez écrit : You could pick the most conservative of your formats and then adjust after connecting using pa_stream_set_buffer_attr(). Hmm OK. But what's most conservative here? There is over an order of magnitude between float32 7.1 at 192kHz and G.711. Won't it disturb the precise machinery if you take an extreme only to revert back to saner values? -- Rémi Denis-Courmont http://www.remlab.net/ http://fi.linkedin.com/in/remidenis ___ pulseaudio-discuss mailing list pulseaudio-discuss@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/pulseaudio-discuss
Re: [pulseaudio-discuss] Buffering attributes with variable format
On Mon, 2011-10-10 at 22:28 +0300, Rémi Denis-Courmont wrote: Le lundi 10 octobre 2011 21:31:30 Pierre-Louis Bossart, vous avez écrit : I don't have time to waste for threads like these. Oh yeah. Sorry that I spend much of the free time I had in the past few months fixing our code (good), adapting to PulseAudio new requirements (not very good) or working around PulseAudio limitations (bad). But you are right. Intel OTC is surely not paying you to care about mere hobbyists. Let them fuck off. Thanks a lot. None of that gives you the right to be rude and uncivil, so please drop the abrasive attitude and personal remarks. -- Arun ___ pulseaudio-discuss mailing list pulseaudio-discuss@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/pulseaudio-discuss
