[pulseaudio-discuss] Crackling audio with Pulseaudio 4.0 and the simple Pulse API.

[Ian Malone]

On 11 July 2013 10:38, Tanu Kaskinen <tanu.kaskinen at linux.intel.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 2013-07-11 at 01:13 +0200, Peter Meerwald wrote:

>> nevertheless, I think any type-(i) resampler could be relaxed (made more
>> convenient for PA) by implementing a wrapper to add buffering and not
>> pushing back samples to the remap buffer (maybe this is what you meant by
>> simplifying the leftover buffer handling?)
>
> Yes, that's what I meant: make the buffering strictly internal to the
> resampling phase. And by performance hit I mean that you probably will
> have to do an extra copy of the input data when there is leftover data,
> because the leftover and the new input data will have to be concatenated
> in continuous memory area so that the resampler can consume both parts
> in one go (trying to process the data in two phases doesn't work,
> because the resampler most likely won't consume the small amount of
> leftover data).
>

I'm writing from a position of complete ignorance here as to what this
code has to interact with, so maybe it's just not possible in context,
but isn't a ring buffer able to solve the concatenation problem
without copying? Of course maybe this is exactly the leftover samples
handling you're talking about.

-- 
imalone
http://ibmalone.blogspot.co.uk