[pulseaudio-discuss] State of various rate adjustment patches

Maarten Bosmans mkbosmans at gmail.com
Sat Jan 15 17:33:29 PST 2011

The branch is up at
ready for merging, as far a I am concerned.

I'm still not entirely sure whether the change of
is correct, but it seems to avoid unnecessary rewinds for me.

I've tested module-loopback by playing to a null-sink and looping its
monitor to the real alsa sink. This showed good behaviour, but may be
the algorithm I used for module-rtp-recv should also be used here.
Does anyone has a better suggestion for a setup to test
module-loopback? null-sink and alsa have very stable latencies, so its
no good test for module-loopback.


2011/1/15 Maarten Bosmans <mkbosmans at gmail.com>:
> 2011/1/15 Colin Guthrie <gmane at colin.guthr.ie>:
>> Hi,
>> I know people (i.e. Maarten) are discussing and proposing various rate
>> adjustment patches just now. Not quite got a grasp on whether any of
>> them are ready for merging so if/when they are, please just poke me.
>> Col
> The patches I sent to the list were mainly to illustrate the ideas I
> was discussing. I am trying to make a coherent set out of them. Things
> remaining are:
>  - smoothing of the estimated (real) sample rate in module-rtp-recv.
> I'm tryng to find a balance between very good runtime behaviour and
> keeping the algorithm not too complicated.
>  - module-loopback. I just need to setup a loopback and start some testing.
> I would have expected that module-tunnel also needs sample rate
> adjustments, but it appears it does not. Is that correct?
> module-echo-cancel also seems to do sample rate adjustments. But it
> seems that it is not completely implemented yet (there are commented
> lines), so unless the author of that module explains what de desired
> behaviour is, I'll just leave that.
> I'll try to make a patch set and send them to the list for (hopefully)
> final review.
> Maarten

More information about the pulseaudio-discuss mailing list