08.02.2015 13:21, Alexander E. Patrakov wrote:
08.02.2015 02:14, Georg Chini wrote:
Sorry, but I do not think the smoother is the problem here. I do get
quite reliable latency results.
The problem is really (if there is a problem at all) the execution time
of the code. These are not
I think there is some misunderstanding. Let me repeat in a different
way.
The smoother works perfectly (both for timer-based scheduling and for
the needs of your module) on non-batch cards.
But, even for batch cards, where timer-based scheduling is disabled,
the smoother is active and is
in the case of timer-based scheduling (where even module-alsa-sink
does not trust the result, i.e. discards it if it is greater than the
non-transformed time interval). And, if I recollect correctly, there
were complaints about it being fooled by batch cards, and they were
cited as one of the
On 08.02.2015 14:03, Alexander E. Patrakov wrote:
08.02.2015 17:35, Georg Chini wrote:
I think there is some misunderstanding. Let me repeat in a different
way.
The smoother works perfectly (both for timer-based scheduling and for
the needs of your module) on non-batch cards.
But, even for
08.02.2015 17:35, Georg Chini wrote:
I think there is some misunderstanding. Let me repeat in a different
way.
The smoother works perfectly (both for timer-based scheduling and for
the needs of your module) on non-batch cards.
But, even for batch cards, where timer-based scheduling is
On 08.02.2015 16:52, Alexander E. Patrakov wrote:
OK, then I think there was some misunderstanding on my side. Could you
please post some log lines with two USB devices to completely clear
this up? I want logs without the stop criterion (which is properly
called a deadband), and with both
01.02.2015 03:43, Georg Chini wrote:
This is the final version of my patch for module-loopback. It is on top of the
patch I sent about an hour ago and contains a lot more changes than the previous
versions:
- Honor specified latency if possible, if not adjust to the lowest possible
value
-
08.02.2015 22:43, Georg Chini wrote:
On 08.02.2015 16:52, Alexander E. Patrakov wrote:
OK, then I think there was some misunderstanding on my side. Could you
please post some log lines with two USB devices to completely clear
this up? I want logs without the stop criterion (which is properly
On 08.02.2015 19:33, Alexander E. Patrakov wrote:
08.02.2015 22:43, Georg Chini wrote:
On 08.02.2015 16:52, Alexander E. Patrakov wrote:
OK, then I think there was some misunderstanding on my side. Could you
please post some log lines with two USB devices to completely clear
this up? I want
01.02.2015 03:43, Georg Chini wrote:
+/* Minimum number of adjust times + 1 needed to adjust at 0.75% deviation
from base rate */
+min_cycles = (double)abs(latency_difference) / u-adjust_time / 0.0075 + 1;
+
+/* Rate calculation, maximum deviation from base rate will be less than
08.02.2015 18:50, Georg Chini wrote:
On 08.02.2015 14:03, Alexander E. Patrakov wrote:
08.02.2015 17:35, Georg Chini wrote:
I think there is some misunderstanding. Let me repeat in a different
way.
The smoother works perfectly (both for timer-based scheduling and for
the needs of your
On 08.02.2015 20:30, Georg Chini wrote:
On 08.02.2015 19:54, Alexander E. Patrakov wrote:
01.02.2015 03:43, Georg Chini wrote:
+/* Minimum number of adjust times + 1 needed to adjust at 0.75%
deviation from base rate */
+min_cycles = (double)abs(latency_difference) / u-adjust_time /
On 08.02.2015 19:54, Alexander E. Patrakov wrote:
01.02.2015 03:43, Georg Chini wrote:
+/* Minimum number of adjust times + 1 needed to adjust at 0.75%
deviation from base rate */
+min_cycles = (double)abs(latency_difference) / u-adjust_time /
0.0075 + 1;
+
+/* Rate calculation,
09.02.2015 00:35, Georg Chini пишет:
On 08.02.2015 20:30, Georg Chini wrote:
On 08.02.2015 19:54, Alexander E. Patrakov wrote:
01.02.2015 03:43, Georg Chini wrote:
+/* Minimum number of adjust times + 1 needed to adjust at 0.75%
deviation from base rate */
+min_cycles =
On 08.02.2015 19:34, Alexander E. Patrakov wrote:
01.02.2015 03:43, Georg Chini wrote:
This is the final version of my patch for module-loopback. It is on
top of the
patch I sent about an hour ago and contains a lot more changes than
the previous
versions:
- Honor specified latency if
15 matches
Mail list logo
