That's what I tried to do before, but the number varies wildly (10-30%, and that's with paplay and without resampling). Perhaps looking at the total CPU time used would be a better measure, but I think it would be noisy too. On Tue, Sep 30, 2014, at 09:43, David Henningsson wrote: > > > On 2014-09-29 16:33, Lauren?iu Nicola wrote: > > If nobody tried it, I might test the patch on my USB DAC. The problem is > > that I'm not sure what's the best way to benchmark the playback. Do you > > have some tips on that? > > Run "top" in a low-latency playback scenario, that should be enough. You > might want to verify (e g with pactl) that you end up with the same > latency both with and without the patch. > > Maybe others have more accurate methods to measure CPU consumption. > > -- > David Henningsson, Canonical Ltd. > https://launchpad.net/~diwic > _______________________________________________ > pulseaudio-discuss mailing list > pulseaudio-discuss at lists.freedesktop.org > http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/pulseaudio-discuss
