From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Raymond Yau Subject: Re: Latency of mixer reconfiguration Date: Sat, 20 Feb 2010 11:59:29 +0800 Message-ID: <4f3252891002191959v418f6cb4u6cf4b4deb0a7a15b@mail.gmail.com> References: <20100217181530.GA23152@tango.0pointer.de> <20100218100127.GJ2032@sirena.org.uk> <20100218180422.GA5606@tango.0pointer.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mail-pw0-f51.google.com (mail-pw0-f51.google.com [209.85.160.51]) by alsa0.perex.cz (Postfix) with ESMTP id E26A41037E3 for ; Sat, 20 Feb 2010 04:59:30 +0100 (CET) Received: by pwi9 with SMTP id 9so719780pwi.38 for ; Fri, 19 Feb 2010 19:59:29 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <20100218180422.GA5606@tango.0pointer.de> 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: alsa-devel@alsa-project.org List-Id: alsa-devel@alsa-project.org 2010/2/19 Lennart Poettering > > On Thu, 18.02.10 10:01, Mark Brown (broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com) > wrote: > > > The current logic is to not do any software adjustment if the hardware > adjustment is "close enough" to the total adjustment we want to do, > tested against a threshold. Which I think is quite a reasonable > approach because it enables/disables this feature not globally, but > looks at each case and enables this logic only if it really has a > benefit. > > Lennart > > PA 's watermark is already 20 ms if you want to do any software adjustment by PA server