[pulseaudio-discuss] alsa pulse bugs
gmane at colin.guthr.ie
Mon May 5 03:31:13 PDT 2008
tom at dbservice.com wrote:
>> Closest it says is: "It's positive and less than buffer size in normal
>> So perhaps this is an invalid assumption at the wine side?
> However this part:
> Delay is distance between current application frame position and sound
> frame position.
> suggests that it indeed can be zero. Or why would a soundcard have a
> gap between the read and write positions if it has played everything?
Indeed. I agree. However, for me this is something that should not be in
high level documentation, that should be an internal thing (i.e. it's a
detail of the implementation). It's perfectly true of hardware devices
(no doubt the context when the docs were written) but perhaps this
should not be true of non-h/w or ioplug based "devices"? Someone who
vaguely understands the ALSA stuff should have a better insight on this
to comment :p
>> Is there perhaps a more appropriate API call they can use to do whatever
>> test they are doing?
> What Wine needs to know, is whether a particular sample has already
> been played or not. It does 'bytes_written - delay_in_bytes' to find
> out how much of the written data the soundcard has already played. If
> there is a better test for it, please explain.
I've no idea, I'm just throwing up ideas/suggestions/opinions... there
is little technical background from my comments, just trying to raise
some points so people more familiar than I can comment :)
More information about the pulseaudio-discuss