[pulseaudio-discuss] [PATCH 00/11] A new srchannel based protocol for PulseAudio

Thomas Martitz kugel at rockbox.org
Mon May 5 22:35:32 PDT 2014

Am 06.05.2014 00:20, schrieb David Henningsson:
> On 2014-04-30 07:35, Thomas Martitz wrote:
>> Am 29.04.2014 15:22, schrieb David Henningsson:
>>> Okay, so second iteration. The patch is no longer a draft, and numbers
>>> look good; Peter Meerwald has confirmed my numbers of 15 - 25% less
>>> CPU in
>>> low latency scenarios (right)?
>>> That said, I guess the patches could use more testing, e g corner
>>> cases such
>>> as what happens if either side suddenly dies, if the ringbuffer gets
>>> full etc.
>>> Tech overview:
>>> The srchannel (Shared Ringbuffer Channel) is made up of two
>>> ringbuffers in
>>> shared memory. For signaling, we use pa_fdsem.
>> Hello,
>> I'm not in the position for technical review but...I can't help it but I
>> always read srcchannel and think it has to do with sources. Other
>> newcomers might get confused too. Perhaps a less confusing short name
>> can be found?
> How about rbchannel (short for RingBufferChannel)?

Does the prefix have to be two chars max? Otherwise I'd propose 
shrngchannel (or perhaps just shrchannel). I guess the "shared" aspect 
is signifcant and shouldn't be dropped, but at the end of the day it's 
just a name.

Best regards

More information about the pulseaudio-discuss mailing list