<html> <head> <base href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/"> </head> <body> <div> <a class="bz_bug_link bz_status_NEW " title="NEW - pa_simple_get_latency() reports latency inaccurately" href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=81075#c18">Comment # 18</a> on <a class="bz_bug_link bz_status_NEW " title="NEW - pa_simple_get_latency() reports latency inaccurately" href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=81075">bug 81075</a> from <a class="email" href="mailto:tanuk@iki.fi" title="Tanu Kaskinen <tanuk@iki.fi>"> Tanu Kaskinen</a> <pre>With the full API you can get the negative latencies in your application, yes, but I'm not sure if that's any more "right", unless you're recording from monitor sources that really can have negative latencies (negative latency means "seeing in the future", and with monitor sources that's possible, because you may sometimes get the audio to your application before the sound goes to the speakers). If you're not using a monitor source, a negative latency means that there's a bug in PulseAudio. I think my patch is ok, even though changing negative latencies to zero makes the latency calculations jumpy. The root cause seems to be in pa_stream_get_latency(), more specifically in the smoother that estimates how much audio has been played in total based on the current time and the past timing information updates from the server. The smoother is consistently estimating the played amount to be too low, and that makes the calculated latency negative.</pre> </div> <hr> You are receiving this mail because: <ul> <li>You are the assignee for the bug.</li> <li>You are the QA Contact for the bug.</li> </ul> </body> </html>