2011/1/31 Colin Guthrie <gmane at colin.guthr.ie>: > 'Twas brillig, and Maarten Bosmans at 31/01/11 10:36 did gyre and gimble: >> 2011/1/16 Maarten Bosmans <mkbosmans at gmail.com>: >>> The branch is up at >>> https://github.com/mkbosmans/pulseaudio/compare/master...rate-adjustment >>> ready for merging, as far a I am concerned. >>> >>> I'm still not entirely sure whether the change of >>> https://github.com/mkbosmans/pulseaudio/commit/72b90ea8ac53e23862284991a2ce355de250f585 >>> is correct, but it seems to avoid unnecessary rewinds for me. >>> >>> I've tested module-loopback by playing to a null-sink and looping its >>> monitor to the real alsa sink. This showed good behaviour, but may be >>> the algorithm I used for module-rtp-recv should also be used here. >>> Does anyone has a better suggestion for a setup to test >>> module-loopback? null-sink and alsa have very stable latencies, so its >>> no good test for module-loopback. >> >> There where no objections on the list, so I guess the branch at >> https://github.com/mkbosmans/pulseaudio/compare/master...rate-adjustment >> can be merged with master. > > Cool, thanks Maaren. I'll pull in David's changes and then yours. On the issue of stable-queue: The first commit is definitaly a bugfix which should be included to stable-queue http://git.0pointer.de/?p=pulseaudio.git;a=commit;h=11dbe30bfae09235307115f413fb6172df04a895 The second commit [8b4cb54595baeeb1d9b7d11a842ef7946e43a55a Limit rate adjustments to small, inaudible jumps] has some fairly straightforward logic which solves some bugs. I think this can go into stable, as there is not much that can go wrong. As I have only tested the patches on two different network setups (both wired, one busy and one without other traffic), I can't really vouch for the next commits. I don't really expect any troubles, but some testing by others would probably be warranted. Anyway, if you do decide to include them into stable-queue, I'd lump the next three commits together, ending with 27db0603d6af7d25558af38ed525fc50330a9c32. As I said before, the last commit [72b90ea8ac53e23862284991a2ce355de250f585] is really beyond my understanding of rewinds and would definately not be appropriate for stable-queue without further review. Also, it has not been tested in combination with David's rewind patches, so that needs to be done too. Maarten
