just to expand on that a bit. you can build a push model API on top of a pull model API fairly easily; the other way around is hard.
all the pro-audio APIs that have ever existed use pull model, because it implicitly respects and models the hardware's realtime constraints.
encouraging (forcing) applications to use this model is an important part of why pull model APIs work.
On Thu, Jan 18, 2018 at 9:33 PM, Paul Davis <paul@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
pulseaudio doesn't support the pull model audio API, and partially as a result, can't get down to the kinds of latencies that JACK can.On Thu, Jan 18, 2018 at 7:10 PM, Michael Jarosch <riotsound@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:Then: What's missing to make pulseaudio being able to handle pro-audioAm Donnerstag, den 18.01.2018, 18:07 -0500 schrieb Paul Davis:
>
>
> On Thu, Jan 18, 2018 at 5:46 PM, Will Godfrey <willgodfrey@musically.
> me.uk> wrote:
> >
> > Very interesting info here, but I'm trying to understand a scenario
> > where you'd
> > want different latencies within a single environment.
>
> running low latency music creation or pro-audio software at the same
> time as using a web-browser or skype or something else that has no
> need or desire to be real-time safe.
(and resolves us from the sound-server-mess :) )?
Greets!
Mitsch
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user@lists.linuxaudio.org
https://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
_______________________________________________ Linux-audio-user mailing list Linux-audio-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
