On Thu, Dec 17, 2009 at 4:43 PM, Takashi Iwai tiwai@suse.de wrote:
At Thu, 17 Dec 2009 16:31:08 +0900, jassi brar wrote:
On Thu, Dec 17, 2009 at 4:02 PM, Takashi Iwai tiwai@suse.de wrote:
At Thu, 17 Dec 2009 15:00:02 +0900, jassisinghbrar@gmail.com wrote:
From: Jassi Brar jassi.brar@samsung.com
The check for at least 'avail_min' available data before calling wake_up doesn't always hold good as it does not guarantee callbacks at each periodic interrupt.
Well, avail_min can be greater than period_size. And, avail_min won't be less than period size.
For example, when avail_min = 2.5 x period_size, the driver wakes up in periods like 3, 2, 3, 2, ...
correct, but if we ensure wake_up's after each period and let the 'sleepers' track if the data available is enough or not, we will have more fine grained control. The point is:- Waking up _after_ avail_min is working, but does waking up before avail_min(but at period boundary) break the system?
PulseAudio may complain :)
I meant effects on ALSA state-machine within the kernel.