On 2014-04-29 15:51, Peter Meerwald wrote:
Hello,
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)?
The ALSA thread logic should remain unchanged, regardless of protocol
mechanism. So maybe this is mostly a measure of the general accuracy :-)
right, I was interested in further optimization opportunities, this does
not really relate to srchannel
What I'd like to do is to also set up ringbuffers directly between the
client and the I/O thread - this should result in even bigger savings
for the PA main thread, which would not have to wake up just to receive
a message and send it further - but I haven't looked into that yet, so I
don't know how difficult it would be.
So that's a possible improvement, but I don't want to promise anything
at this point.
I guess a perf on the client would show bigger differences.
will do this when benchmarking the current patches...
Thanks!
Btw, I think I found what caused the pactl segfault for you - I got a
segfault too (at the end of "pactl list") while working on the 2nd
iteration. It's fixed in this patch series.
--
David Henningsson, Canonical Ltd.
https://launchpad.net/~diwic
_______________________________________________
pulseaudio-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/pulseaudio-discuss
