Re: [pulseaudio-discuss] [PATCH 2/2] memblockq-test: fix incorrect assumption of pa_memblockq_pop_missing() behaviour

On Mon, 2017-01-02 at 10:19 +0100, Pierre Ossman wrote: > On 31/12/16 17:26, Ahmed S. Darwish wrote: > > On Fri, Dec 30, 2016 at 05:52:36PM +0200, Tanu Kaskinen wrote: > > > diff --git a/src/tests/memblockq-test.c b/src/tests/memblockq-test.c > > > index fc83d99..2a9b88a 100644 > > > --- a/src/test

Re: [pulseaudio-discuss] [PATCH 2/2] memblockq-test: fix incorrect assumption of pa_memblockq_pop_missing() behaviour

On Sun, 2017-01-01 at 09:02 +0200, Ahmed S. Darwish wrote: > On Sun, Jan 01, 2017 at 04:17:16AM +0200, Tanu Kaskinen wrote: > > On Sat, 2016-12-31 at 18:26 +0200, Ahmed S. Darwish wrote: > > > Hi! > > > > > > On Fri, Dec 30, 2016 at 05:52:36PM +0200, Tanu Kaskinen wrote: > > > > The intuitive mean

Re: [pulseaudio-discuss] [PATCH 2/2] memblockq-test: fix incorrect assumption of pa_memblockq_pop_missing() behaviour

On 31/12/16 17:26, Ahmed S. Darwish wrote: On Fri, Dec 30, 2016 at 05:52:36PM +0200, Tanu Kaskinen wrote: diff --git a/src/tests/memblockq-test.c b/src/tests/memblockq-test.c index fc83d99..2a9b88a 100644 --- a/src/tests/memblockq-test.c +++ b/src/tests/memblockq-test.c @@ -421,74 +421,129 @@ S