On Wed, 03 Mar 2010 08:07:52 +0200 Eero Nurkkala <ext-eero.nurkkala@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Mostly the samples were good (49/50, @48khz, 2 channels, value polled > from userpace), but the remaining 1/50 were garbage - and actually > matched the probability of a simultaneous DMA burst. So the problem is - > if you read at time t0, and the DMA burst is taking place at the same > time - you get a value that looks rather random, as when (if) you poll > the position @ t0 + n uS, the value is (after some usecs) a lot > different. Or maybe the XBUFFSTAT just isn't reliable at all (regardless > of DMA bursts etc). > Yeah, that's interesting to find out are the XBUFFSTAT reading differences inside the DMA burst size or distributed completely randomly. I think the XBUFFSTAT should increase at the sample rate and decrease or jump down fast when the DMA burst takes place. -- Jarkko _______________________________________________ Alsa-devel mailing list Alsa-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://mailman.alsa-project.org/mailman/listinfo/alsa-devel
