On Sun, Jun 30, 2013 at 11:02 PM, Alan Stern <stern@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Naturally, under normal circumstances this won't matter, because > underruns shouldn't occur. But I know from experience that people try > to push the latency as far down as they can, which increases the > likelihood of underruns. I understand the latency is effected by packet count in one URB, and it shouldn't be related with URB count, so looks we still can ease the problem by submitting more URBs concurrently, and at the same time make less packets per URB if guys care latency. Correct me if it is wrong... On Mon, Jul 1, 2013 at 7:36 PM, Clemens Ladisch <clemens@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > The audio drivers uses at least two URBs. (The actual number and length > of URBs depends on how the application configures its buffer.) Clemens, thanks for your input. Also, another important data about the problem is that how much time one isoc URB may span, which depends on the endpoint interval and packet number of URB. Thanks, -- Ming Lei -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-usb" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
