From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.5 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, USER_AGENT_SANE_2 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 40970C433DF for ; Sun, 28 Jun 2020 22:03:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: from alsa0.perex.cz (alsa0.perex.cz [77.48.224.243]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BC8FB20672 for ; Sun, 28 Jun 2020 22:03:32 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=alsa-project.org header.i=@alsa-project.org header.b="u6o+9sHs" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org BC8FB20672 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=shiny.it Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=alsa-devel-bounces@alsa-project.org Received: from alsa1.perex.cz (alsa1.perex.cz [207.180.221.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by alsa0.perex.cz (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4793F1658; Mon, 29 Jun 2020 00:02:41 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 alsa0.perex.cz 4793F1658 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=alsa-project.org; s=default; t=1593381811; bh=AKxB/KByGwKPOZjfElEjXzlOSRyCC4vZgiDhIk3CYu8=; h=Date:From:To:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Cc:List-Id: List-Unsubscribe:List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help:List-Subscribe: From; b=u6o+9sHserPsgC35yjuffPKNcch9LCAMlhKOaWraUc7nYIKUztblwLpMuYbHkrdHF dMa3AmeuRF1osdHcTk/fM8WpwWz9MpuF9Z9JNmbzoJdxRatoiDNG5Ezaf52lujb+X6 2FEWbzoOBAOJyeV2P9vXp/HmjrF2RLvXOY4jHbmc= Received: from alsa1.perex.cz (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by alsa1.perex.cz (Postfix) with ESMTP id B868CF800F0; Mon, 29 Jun 2020 00:02:40 +0200 (CEST) Received: by alsa1.perex.cz (Postfix, from userid 50401) id D5906F8022D; Mon, 29 Jun 2020 00:02:38 +0200 (CEST) Received: from denise.shiny.it (denise.shiny.it [185.206.84.1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by alsa1.perex.cz (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 166D5F800B4 for ; Mon, 29 Jun 2020 00:02:30 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 alsa1.perex.cz 166D5F800B4 Received: from wc1 (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by denise.shiny.it (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 05SM2Rl5008557; Mon, 29 Jun 2020 00:02:27 +0200 Date: Mon, 29 Jun 2020 00:02:32 +0200 From: Giuliano Pochini To: Mark Hills Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] echoaudio: Address bugs in the interrupt handling Message-ID: <20200629000139.0212fa11@wc1> In-Reply-To: <2006192200200.12984@tamla.localdomain> References: <2006161409060.30751@stax.localdomain> <20200616131743.4793-3-mark@xwax.org> <20200617000134.60c5e2b5@wc1> <2006171158070.2561@stax.localdomain> <20200619215655.07b6f3ed@wc1> <2006192200200.12984@tamla.localdomain> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.16.0 (GTK+ 2.24.32; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Takashi Iwai , alsa-devel@alsa-project.org X-BeenThere: alsa-devel@alsa-project.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: "Alsa-devel mailing list for ALSA developers - http://www.alsa-project.org" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: alsa-devel-bounces@alsa-project.org Sender: "Alsa-devel" On Fri, 19 Jun 2020 22:21:54 +0100 (BST) Mark Hills wrote: > On Fri, 19 Jun 2020, Giuliano Pochini wrote: > > > On Wed, 17 Jun 2020 12:14:42 +0100 (BST) > > Mark Hills wrote: > > > [...] > > > You might be able to do the comparison before wrapping pipe_position, > > > but hopefully you'll consider my patch in reply to Takashi has more > > > clarity. > > > > Your patch is very interesting. I didn't take into account the idea of > > advancing the position by full periods only. If the PCM subsystem > > hasn't changed much since I last checked (I wrote the driver many years > > ago), it should work fine (and I'm sure you tested it). But I don't > > know if something else requires better resolution. > > It's funny, but I didn't take account of the opposite; that there was any > merits to polling inbetween the interrupts for better resolution. > > Takashi pointed out the need for this and we had some discussion. Check > the other thread, where I provided a newer revision of the code. > > The good thing is I think we can have all the things we want and be bug > free, just I have to understand the specification. > > It would be great if you would like to take a look at the newer code for > any problems you can see. I was going to run it for a few days then turn > it into some patches. I looked at your code and I think it's OK. I'm using it for some days without any problem. I also stressed it with pretty tight timings and it worked fine all the time. Since I could not reproduce that problem before, except in some rare random circumstances, I'm not a good tester at all. At most I can say that your patch does not make things worse :) -- Giuliano.