From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Clemens Ladisch Subject: Re: hw_ptr_interrupt removal broke interrupt pointer updates Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2010 15:12:56 +0100 Message-ID: <4B6049E8.5000401@ladisch.de> References: <4B5EF09B.3040900@ladisch.de> <4B600C3E.6090208@ladisch.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from out2.smtp.messagingengine.com (out2.smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.26]) by alsa0.perex.cz (Postfix) with ESMTP id 332811038E6 for ; Wed, 27 Jan 2010 15:12:59 +0100 (CET) In-Reply-To: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: alsa-devel-bounces@alsa-project.org Errors-To: alsa-devel-bounces@alsa-project.org To: Jaroslav Kysela Cc: alsa-devel@alsa-project.org List-Id: alsa-devel@alsa-project.org Jaroslav Kysela wrote: > On Wed, 27 Jan 2010, Clemens Ladisch wrote: > > A somewhat unrelated issue: Both old and new code assume that > > hw_ptr==0 is a period boundary, but that is not true if the boundary > > is not an integer multiple of the period size, and the pointer wraps. > > I'm not sure what happens then. > > I'm not exactly sure what you're talking about. Where is the > hw_ptr==0 assumption? This code, which tries to align hw_ptr_interrupt to a period boundary: runtime->hw_ptr_interrupt = new_hw_ptr - (new_hw_ptr % runtime->period_size); Best regards, Clemens