http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=28517 --- Comment #29 from Raymond <superquad.vortex2(a)gmail.com> 2011-10-09 21:02:27 CDT --- (In reply to comment #18)
Why do you care at all about ALSA's period? It can be as low as 1ms (e.g. with a 8000Hz sample I got 1ms period and 8.192ms buffer). I don't want to bear 1000 interrupts a second. Wine should ignore ALSA's period for as long as we don't use poll(alsa's_fd) and the buffer is large enough for our periodic feeder. See http://mailman.alsa-project.org/pipermail/alsa-devel/2011-August/042837.html
Yeah, good point. This also gets rid of the "two timers" business that I didn't like.
disable period wakeup is mainly for low power consumption, this has impact on those application require low latency How can you get exact 10ms period time when the rate is 11025 Hz and 22050 Hz ? what is the difference between DSBCAPS_TRUEPLAYPOSITION and DSBCAPS_GETCURRENTPOSITION2 ? -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching all bug changes.