On Jan 30 2016 14:04, Jonathan Woithe wrote:
If you have different stories, please show reasoning from enough facts, at
first. Not from your opinion or memories.
Sending timestamps derived from a fixed interval did not provide reliable
audio output from these devices in general. This was observed with real
hardware and tangentially, the hardware did not send SPH timestamps with a
fixed interval either. At 48 kHz for example, deviations from a difference
of 512 were routinely observed in both directions even with official drivers
on vendor-supported OSes.
This statement includes mixture of facts, your opinions and the lack of
information:
- facts:
- When reading packet dumps, the sequence of SPH in tx/rx packets
includes time stamps which are not even lapses.
- opinions:
- The sequence of SPH with even lapses doesn't bring reliable audio
output.
- the others without enough information:
- As long as _you_ experienced, putting time stamps with even lapses
to SPH in rx packets causes non-reliable audio output. (But which
models? the way to generate the time stamp? and so on?)
As long as I investigated, packets from
828/828mk2/828mk3(FireWire/Hybrid) at 48.0kHz of sampling transmission
frequency(stf) the sequence of SPH in each data block includes differed
lapses. In theory, in this stf, the gap between two successive time
stamp should be 512 ticks at time representation on IEEE 1394 bus,
however it's sometimes 511 or 513 in fact. This is also the same packets
from driver for Windows operating system.The algorithm to generate
exactly the same sequence of SPH is not clear yet.
However, we program IEC 61883-1/6 engine of ALSA firewire stack with an
assumption that time stamps include even lapses:
http://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/tiwai/sound.git/tree/sound/firewire/amdtp-stream.c#n301
As long as handling packets with this engine, the sequence of time stamp
should includes even lapses for correct calculation. In this reason, I
use the pre-computed table.
Well, when using a kind of words such as 'in general', 'all',
'absolutely', 'resolutely', it's a signs of over-generalization and you
should pay enough attention to what you're going to describe. And when
describing the facts, subject of contexts is important. You still have a
tendency of these wrong directions, in my opinion.
Regards
Takashi Sakamoto
_______________________________________________
Alsa-devel mailing list
Alsa-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://mailman.alsa-project.org/mailman/listinfo/alsa-devel
