[pulseaudio-tickets] [Bug 56993] Implement opus audio compression

bugzilla-daemon at freedesktop.org bugzilla-daemon at freedesktop.org
Sun Aug 20 09:21:12 UTC 2017


https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=56993

--- Comment #15 from Tanu Kaskinen <tanuk at iki.fi> ---
(In reply to Arun Raghavan from comment #14)
> (In reply to Tanu Kaskinen from comment #13)
> > So, are you against any compression support in the native protocol or not?
> 
> I am not in favour of having encoding/decoding being part of our protocol.
> This added complexity in the native protocol is not worth the gains for the
> (imo) relatively uncommon use-case of tunnel modules.

Ok, so if it was up to you, tunnels would never ever transparently compress the
audio that gets sent over the network, because that causes an uncomfortable
amount of complexity in the native protocol.

> I'm not against the native protocol supporting compressed audio. i.e.
> clients providing compressed audio for devices that support compressed
> playback. in fact, this is something I would actively like to have, but
> there are tricky bits to deal with latency reporting, rewinds, etc.

Isn't this already supported? Or do you mean avoiding the IEC61937 wrapping?

> That said, if we had this, then the tunnel modules themselves could do the
> encode/decode.

I don't follow.

> I am curious about your views on this -- do you think this is something we
> should add to the native protocol, or are you batting for this since the
> work has been done, or ...?

In my opinion tunnels should not be forever doomed to waste bandwidth. The
patch that was submitted should be reviewed, and I wouldn't like to give a
response of "will not accept the feature, don't try again". I haven't looked
deeply into the patch, so I don't know how close it's to my liking, but in
principle transparent encoding/decoding in the TCP transport doesn't seem very
complicated. It shouldn't affect e.g. rewinding, if all buffers are PCM, and
just the in-transit data is compressed.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
You are the QA Contact for the bug.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/pulseaudio-bugs/attachments/20170820/72874ba0/attachment.html>


More information about the pulseaudio-bugs mailing list