<html>
<head>
<base href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/" />
</head>
<body>
<p>
<div>
<b><a class="bz_bug_link
bz_status_REOPENED "
title="REOPENED --- - audio broken in 24Hz/24p since 3.11 (regression)"
href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=69675#c43">Comment # 43</a>
on <a class="bz_bug_link
bz_status_REOPENED "
title="REOPENED --- - audio broken in 24Hz/24p since 3.11 (regression)"
href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=69675">bug 69675</a>
from <span class="vcard"><a class="email" href="mailto:pierre-bugzilla@ossman.eu" title="Pierre Ossman <pierre-bugzilla@ossman.eu>"> <span class="fn">Pierre Ossman</span></a>
</span></b>
<pre>(In reply to <a href="show_bug.cgi?id=69675#c40">comment #40</a>)
<span class="quote">> > 1. The 25175 clock at 44.1 kHz is out of spec. There are no correct values to
> > make it in spec. So either change the clock, rely on hw calculated values, or
> > hope that sinks tolerate the large N.
>
> 4th alternative is to round CTS and leave the glitches in on those modes. I
> might even slightly prefer that than produce out-of-spec N, but that is just
> my preference and I don't really have any real-world data of course...</span >
If we truncate the clock to 25274 instead instead of rounding it up, we can get
sensible N/CTS. Is that something that's possible to do? I don't know how the
code that generates the clock looks like.</pre>
</div>
</p>
<hr>
<span>You are receiving this mail because:</span>
<ul>
<li>You are the assignee for the bug.</li>
</ul>
</body>
</html>