[pulseaudio-discuss] [PATCH] bluetooth: Fix rendering a2dp data

Maarten Lankhorst m.b.lankhorst at gmail.com
Tue Dec 14 01:10:57 PST 2010


  Hi Luiz,

Op 13-12-10 09:55, Luiz Augusto von Dentz schreef:
> Hi,
>
> On Sat, Dec 11, 2010 at 1:05 AM, Maarten Lankhorst
> <m.b.lankhorst at gmail.com>  wrote:
>> makes my android phone slightly happier
>> ---
>>   src/modules/bluetooth/module-bluetooth-device.c |   11 ++++++++---
>>   1 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/src/modules/bluetooth/module-bluetooth-device.c b/src/modules/bluetooth/module-bluetooth-device.c
>> index 6d31c1e..8664001 100644
>> --- a/src/modules/bluetooth/module-bluetooth-device.c
>> +++ b/src/modules/bluetooth/module-bluetooth-device.c
>> @@ -1387,7 +1387,7 @@ static int a2dp_process_push(struct userdata *u) {
>>      pa_assert(u->source);
>>      pa_assert(u->read_smoother);
>>
>> -    memchunk.memblock = pa_memblock_new(u->core->mempool, u->block_size);
>> +    memchunk.memblock = pa_memblock_new(u->core->mempool, u->block_size * 2);
>>      memchunk.index = memchunk.length = 0;
> Im not sure how this would help, we decode sbc frame by frame so
> having twice as much memory doesn't really make any sense, there could
> be that we should decode the entire buffer read, but that would take
> much more memory. What could be the real problem is that the source is
> changing the bitpool but that shouldn't be a problem since the
> block_size is supposed to be calculated from maximum bitpool range so
> the buffer will always be big enough.
Well it seems the block_size is not fixed on my phone, sometimes it is 1 
sample more, sometimes 2, the net effect is 1 or 2 frames stay undecoded 
leading to massive underruns.

I don't think u->block_size has to be fixed per se, a2dp->code_size 
seems to be though.
>>      for (;;) {
>> @@ -1442,7 +1442,8 @@ static int a2dp_process_push(struct userdata *u) {
>>          to_decode = l - sizeof(*header) - sizeof(*payload);
>>
>>          d = pa_memblock_acquire(memchunk.memblock);
>> -        to_write = memchunk.length = pa_memblock_get_length(memchunk.memblock);
>> +        to_write = pa_memblock_get_length(memchunk.memblock);
>> +        memchunk.length = 0;
>>
>>          while (PA_LIKELY(to_decode>  0&&  to_write>  0)) {
>>              size_t written;
>> @@ -1464,7 +1465,7 @@ static int a2dp_process_push(struct userdata *u) {
>>   /*             pa_log_debug("SBC: frame_length: %lu; codesize: %lu", (unsigned long) a2dp->frame_length, (unsigned long) a2dp->codesize); */
>>
>>              pa_assert_fp((size_t) decoded<= to_decode);
>> -            pa_assert_fp((size_t) decoded == a2dp->frame_length);
>> +            pa_assert_fp((size_t) decoded<= a2dp->frame_length);
> This is the real problem, either we do this if the bitpool is changing
> or we have to call sbc_reinit in each frame.
Well, a2dp->frame_length was calculated based on the maximum bitpool 
size. The frames decoded have a smaller bitpool size. a2dp->codesize is 
still the same though, so I don't think this change matters much.
>>              pa_assert_fp((size_t) written<= to_write);
>>              pa_assert_fp((size_t) written == a2dp->codesize);
>> @@ -1474,10 +1475,14 @@ static int a2dp_process_push(struct userdata *u) {
>>
>>              d = (uint8_t*) d + written;
>>              to_write -= written;
>> +            memchunk.length += written;
>>
>>              frame_count++;
>>          }
>>
>> +        if (to_decode)
>> +            pa_log_error("SBC: %lu bytes not decoded\n", to_decode);
>> +
>>          pa_memblock_release(memchunk.memblock);
> Actually I think we should be solving this in libsbc, both sbc_encode
> and sbc_decode should be checking if the bitpool has changed and
> reinit automatically, otherwise we gonna get performance penalty doing
> sbc_reinit for every frame.
I don't think the bitpool changed, the code just assumes the maximum 
bitpool size, while my phone sends data at a lower one.


Of course I still don't know how to handle packet loss correctly, which 
is easy to create by moving phone out of the range of my bluetooth device.

Cheers,
Maarten



More information about the pulseaudio-discuss mailing list