On Thu, 2012-12-20 at 13:34 +0100, Maarten Lankhorst wrote:
> Op 04-12-12 14:28, joerg-cyril.hoe...@t-systems.com schreef:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Maarten Lankhorst wrote:
> >> Actually in winepulse, sleep / 12000 (8 ms I guess?) ms would work, no
> >> sleep at all works too,
> > Yes, I wanted to go no fu
Op 04-12-12 14:28, joerg-cyril.hoe...@t-systems.com schreef:
> Hi,
>
> Maarten Lankhorst wrote:
>> Actually in winepulse, sleep / 12000 (8 ms I guess?) ms would work, no sleep
>> at all works too,
> Yes, I wanted to go no further than 8ms below the 10ms period limit.
>
>> it was just the mixing of
Hi,
Maarten Lankhorst wrote:
>Actually in winepulse, sleep / 12000 (8 ms I guess?) ms would work, no sleep
>at all works too,
Yes, I wanted to go no further than 8ms below the 10ms period limit.
> it was just the mixing of various levels of sleep that was failing. Not sure
> why though,
> might
Maarten Lankhorst wrote:
>> That was about the relationship between GCP and GetPosition. Now what
>> about GetPosition and wall time (as seen by the HighPerformanceTimer)?
>> The largest delta is 8ms, which suggests that your GetPosition is not
>> particularly regular, but as it stays below one 1
Op 03-12-12 15:42, joerg-cyril.hoe...@t-systems.com schreef:
> Hi,
>
> Maarten Lankhorst kindly posted mmdevapi test results for render and capture
> gathered using his winepulse driver:
> http://www.winehq.org/pipermail/wine-devel/2012-October/097602.html
>
>> render.c:1199: padding 1250 position
Hi,
Maarten Lankhorst kindly posted mmdevapi test results for render and capture
gathered using his winepulse driver:
http://www.winehq.org/pipermail/wine-devel/2012-October/097602.html
>render.c:1199: padding 1250 position 51/21250 slept 470ms iteration 0
I've run your data through some MS-E
