26 Feb
2003
26 Feb
'03
10:10 a.m.
Well, I'll shut up about it. I still think it is a
mistake. I haven't heard
i don't want you to shut about it. its a very important design
decision.
any
convincing (to me) arguments why an application should not handle variable
sized callbacks. VST process() is variable size I think as are EASI xfer
callbacks, but clearly JACK needs constant callbacks and there is nothing
I can do about that...
as i understand it, VST is only variable to allow for automation. And
if you follow the discussion here about XAP and elsewhere about PTAF,
you will see that many people consider this a mistake that comes from
not using "events" in the correct way.
i feel that it should be the job of ALSA to handle period sizes. if it
doesn't do a good job, it should be fixed. if we ask for a wakeup
every time 1024 frames are available, and the interrupts occur at 420,
840 and 1260 frames, then we should be woken up on the third
interrupt, process 1024 frames of data, and go back to sleep. the h/w
driver should handle this, not JACK. the latency behaviour will be
just as requested by the user.
--p