Artur Skawina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'd be great if somebody with a FF card could test the patch, the
> code has worked flawlessly on my vdr server, not a single overflow
> since v2.
i currently test your patch on vdr-1.5.2 with one FF card. i have some
timers pending this afternoon, so st
Klaus Schmidinger wrote:
> If this "auto sized ringbuffers" change (which, from what I can
> see so far - haven't tried it myself - looks like a good idea)
> is ever to make its way into the official VDR source, you'll need
> to get rid of the above waiting. It says in receiver.h:
>
> ...the cal
On 05/10/07 01:55, Artur Skawina wrote:
> Auto sized ringbuffers, changes since v1:
> ...
> diff --git a/recorder.c b/recorder.c
> index 8bb1621..3c0e002 100644
> --- a/recorder.c
> +++ b/recorder.c
> @@ -157,8 +157,20 @@ void cRecorder::Receive(uchar *Data, int Length)
> {
>if (Running()) {
>
Jouni Karvo wrote:
> Stone writes:
> > >
> > > It still wouldn't surprise me if this version caused a few overflows,
> > > but hopefully these will be very rare.
> >
> > I'm curious how streamdev will function with these buffer changes.
>
> And since I am not convinced that this memory footp
Stone wrote:
>
> It still wouldn't surprise me if this version caused a few overflows,
> but hopefully these will be very rare.
>
> I'm curious how streamdev will function with these buffer changes.
it works fine -- i'm using a headless vdr server and streamdev+softdevice
clients, so
t
And since I am not convinced that this memory footprint issue is
significant,
at a first glance, IMHO dynamic buffers are a good thing. we can get
rid of small upper buffer size bounderies all together without wasting
amounts of memory. this should result in even less buffer overflows
when imple
Stone writes:
> >
> > It still wouldn't surprise me if this version caused a few overflows,
> > but hopefully these will be very rare.
>
> I'm curious how streamdev will function with these buffer changes.
And since I am not convinced that this memory footprint issue is
significant, I am co
On 5/10/07, Artur Skawina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Auto sized ringbuffers, changes since v1:
- increased maximum sizes for a few rb users. Most of the time just a
small part will be used, but there will be more room for times when
more is required.
- a little smarter cRingBufferLinear::Read()
