[LAD] Some questions about the Jack callback

Will Godfrey willgodfrey at musically.me.uk
Sun Sep 21 20:31:22 UTC 2014

On Fri, 19 Sep 2014 23:30:50 +0100
Will Godfrey <willgodfrey at musically.me.uk> wrote:

> On Fri, 19 Sep 2014 22:06:32 +0000
> Fons Adriaensen <fons at linuxaudio.org> wrote:
> > On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 10:53:19PM +0100, Will J Godfrey wrote:
> >  
> > > It's probably not worth the effort, but I wondered if the client could attempt
> > > to be a 'good citizen' and take some form of remedial action.
> > 
> > I don't know of any that try to do this. But if a client would
> > want to, the most sensible thing to do in most cases would be
> > to return silence, i.e. clear the output buffers. A client 
> > could do this at the first thing in its process() callback.
> > 
> > Ciao,
> OK, thanks guys. I'll leave it there I think :)

Well, actually...

This might seem a bit obvious, but am I right in thinking that while jack
collects the current inputs it is at the same time pushing out the *previous*
bufferful of data - hence latency.

Will J Godfrey
Say you have a poem and I have a tune.
Exchange them and we can both have a poem, a tune, and a song.

More information about the Linux-audio-dev mailing list