16 Jun
2005
16 Jun
'05
6:57 p.m.
On Thu, 16 Jun 2005 20:20:41 +0200
fons adriaensen <fons.adriaensen(a)skynet.be> wrote:
Ah, i remembered slightly incorrectly. Thanks Paul, for setting me
straight in #ardour. The thing is that the DLL based client thread
wakeup has the ever so slight possibility to do its thing too early.
Thus coreaudio waits a bit more (the "safety offset").
It seems this safety offset is driver specific but usually ranges from
64 to 32 frames (i have no definite source for this, just a bit of
googling). And with a sufficiently low period size used this accounts
for pretty much an extra period of latency..
Flo
--
Palimm Palimm!
http://affenbande.org/~tapas/
The price for
this is afaik an extra period worth of latency. I'm not
sure this is the way to go. Sure it makes handling of devices easier
that do not generate irq's like pci soundcards do (all this USB and
IEEE1394 stuff), but isn't the price too high?
Why should this take a extra period of latency ?