On 10-06-25 02:02 PM, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> Hi :)
> 
> I guess no answer is an answer :D.
> 
Not necessarily.  You could be asking the wrong question and or in the
wrong place.

> There are several ways to program for asynchronous serial interfaces,
> but there's only one way regarding to real time MIDI.
> 

> When I programmed on Assembler in the 80ies I directly talked to the
> UART, and request CTS/RTS for every single byte.
> 
> It's also possible not to use CTS/RTS for every single byte, but than
> you need to add headroom for the time. While it wouldn't be such a
> drama, if 1ms headroom would be 1ms, it's a drama because for such a
> long time a lot of IRQs are able to produce jitter, but a constant
> latency.
> 
> I guess the MIDI coders for Linux did a bad job. I might be wrong, but
> as I said before, getting no answer is getting an answer :(.

I would hesitate to jump to this conclusion if I were you.  I would also
rephrase this.  Saying someone did a bad job but providing no real proof
is not usually a successful strategy in the open source world.

Also getting no answer may indicate a completely different problem.

> Hopefully I'm just paranoid and wrong ;).

I don't think paranoia is the right word.
> 
> Cheers!
> 
> Ralf
> 
> -------- Forwarded Message --------
> From: Ralf Mardorf <[email protected]>
> To: Paul Davis <[email protected]>
> Cc: James Morris <[email protected]>, Linux Audio Developers
> <[email protected]>, 64studio-users
> <[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: [LAD] basic MIDI note-on/note-off questions
> Date: Fri, 25 Jun 2010 15:51:13 +0200
> 
> On Fri, 2010-06-25 at 15:36 +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
>> On Fri, 2010-06-25 at 14:38 +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
>>> On Fri, 2010-06-25 at 08:29 -0400, Paul Davis wrote:
>>>> On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 6:55 AM, James Morris <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> I keep getting surprised at some of the most basic problems I run
>>>>> into... This time, processing order.
>>>>
>>>> just remember that in "real" MIDI, nothing can be simultaneous. its a
>>>> serial protocol without timestamps. with traditional serial MIDI, the
>>>> time interval between bits and bytes is also fixed, creating a fixed
>>>> minimal interval between any two note on/off messages.
>>>
>>> In addition, the UART gives information about being ready to send. It's
>>> not fixed to e.g. 1ms. There's a register giving this information.
>>
>> Note, there's nothing fixed, the limitation is just for the max Baud
>> MIDI is able to do. Regarding to the term 'fixed' UART is for 'Universal
>> Asynchronous Receiver Transmitter', the important word is
>> 'Asynchronous'. We are talking about microseconds, taking care about the
>> CTS and RTS registers. Regarding to all that MIDI jitter, I wonder if
>> ALSA seq, might has to do with it. I don't know, perhaps there are
>> issues for USB specifications, but maybe there's something bad for this
>> 'timestamp' routs.
>>
>> *?*
>>
>> I programmed on Assembler directly using the UART and there never was
>> jitter.
>>
>> Could this be a reason for MIDI jitter using Linux or has it nothing to
>> do with it? Because, at the other hand there's no jitter internal the
>> studio in the box.
>>
>> *?*
>>
>> Ralf
> 
> I can't remember, perhaps CTS and RTS are flags in one register and
> maybe they have other acronyms ;), anyway, this is the important stuff.
> Pedro Lopez-Cabanillas did post the technical specifications.
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 64studio-users mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.64studio.com/mailman/listinfo/64studio-users


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

_______________________________________________
64studio-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.64studio.com/mailman/listinfo/64studio-users

Reply via email to