Re: [Alsa-devel] Some problems with 0.9beta11 drivers

2002-03-25 Thread Ken McMillan
On Mon, 25 Mar 2002, Paul Davis wrote: > >Well, if I am running capture and playback channels in sync, I certainly > >don't want to restart the capture channel (and destroy my recording) in the > >case when the playback buffer under-runs. Keep in mind I have a very short > >buffer for playback (t

Re: [Alsa-devel] Some problems with 0.9beta11 drivers

2002-03-25 Thread Paul Davis
>Well, if I am running capture and playback channels in sync, I certainly >don't want to restart the capture channel (and destroy my recording) in the >case when the playback buffer under-runs. Keep in mind I have a very short >buffer for playback (to keep latency down) but a long buffer for captu

Re: [Alsa-devel] Some problems with 0.9beta11 drivers

2002-03-24 Thread Fernando Pablo Lopez-Lezcano
> > > Actually, I think I found the problem. I was using the maximum number > > > of playback and captures channels reported by the device. For > > > "plughw", this number is apparently 1, rather than the actual > > > number the hardware supports! I guess what I have to do is open the > > > "h

Re: [Alsa-devel] Some problems with 0.9beta11 drivers

2002-03-24 Thread Ken McMillan
On Sun, 24 Mar 2002, Fernando Pablo Lopez-Lezcano wrote: > On Sun, 24 Mar 2002, Ken McMillan wrote: > > Actually, I think I found the problem. I was using the maximum number > > of playback and captures channels reported by the device. For > > "plughw", this number is apparently 1, rather tha

Re: [Alsa-devel] Some problems with 0.9beta11 drivers

2002-03-24 Thread Ken McMillan
On Sun, 24 Mar 2002, Paul Davis wrote: > > >Actually, one more question that I couldn't answer from the API docs: > >What do you have to do to recover from -EPIPE in the case when the > >hardware doesn't stop (i.e., when stop_threshold == UINT_MAX)? Do you > >just retry the write, or is there s

Re: [Alsa-devel] Some problems with 0.9beta11 drivers

2002-03-24 Thread Fernando Pablo Lopez-Lezcano
On Sun, 24 Mar 2002, Ken McMillan wrote: > Actually, I think I found the problem. I was using the maximum number > of playback and captures channels reported by the device. For > "plughw", this number is apparently 1, rather than the actual > number the hardware supports! I guess what I have t

Re: [Alsa-devel] Some problems with 0.9beta11 drivers

2002-03-24 Thread Fernando Pablo Lopez-Lezcano
> > Actually, I think I found the problem. I was using the maximum number > > of playback and captures channels reported by the device. For > > "plughw", this number is apparently 1, rather than the actual > > number the hardware supports! I guess what I have to do is open the > > "hw" device

Re: [Alsa-devel] Some problems with 0.9beta11 drivers

2002-03-24 Thread Andy Wingo
On Sun, 24 Mar 2002, Ken McMillan wrote: > Actually, I think I found the problem. I was using the maximum number > of playback and captures channels reported by the device. For > "plughw", this number is apparently 1, rather than the actual > number the hardware supports! I guess what I have

Re: [Alsa-devel] Some problems with 0.9beta11 drivers

2002-03-24 Thread Paul Davis
> >Actually, I think I found the problem. I was using the maximum number >of playback and captures channels reported by the device. For >"plughw", this number is apparently 1, rather than the actual >number the hardware supports! I guess what I have to do is open the >"hw" device first to get

Re: [Alsa-devel] Some problems with 0.9beta11 drivers

2002-03-24 Thread Ken McMillan
Actually, I think I found the problem. I was using the maximum number of playback and captures channels reported by the device. For "plughw", this number is apparently 1, rather than the actual number the hardware supports! I guess what I have to do is open the "hw" device first to get the ac

Re: [Alsa-devel] Some problems with 0.9beta11 drivers

2002-03-24 Thread Paul Davis
> >Oh -- thanks a lot for the quick answer! But then I guess I'll >rephrase the question: Why would I get xruns with "plughw", but not >with "hw"? 2 possibilities readily spring to mind: 1) the plughw device is causing more code to be run, possibly causing timing issues 2) a bug in the

Re: [Alsa-devel] Some problems with 0.9beta11 drivers

2002-03-24 Thread Ken McMillan
Oh -- thanks a lot for the quick answer! But then I guess I'll rephrase the question: Why would I get xruns with "plughw", but not with "hw"? The -EPIPE occurs deterministically after 3584 frames (7 fragments) are processed. I don't seem to get any -EPIPE errors with "hw". Thanks -- Ken

Re: [Alsa-devel] Some problems with 0.9beta11 drivers

2002-03-24 Thread Paul Davis
>1) The device "pcm.hw:0" seems to work fine, but when I use >"pcm.plughw:0", I get "Broken pipe" from snd_pcm_writei. This happens >even with stop_threshold set to UINT_MAX (i.e., this shouldn't >be caused by underruns). no, setting the stop threshold to this value just prevents the driver from

[Alsa-devel] Some problems with 0.9beta11 drivers

2002-03-24 Thread Ken McMillan
I'm having a few problems with the 0.9beta11 drivers. Perhaps someone has seen these before: 1) The device "pcm.hw:0" seems to work fine, but when I use "pcm.plughw:0", I get "Broken pipe" from snd_pcm_writei. This happens even with stop_threshold set to UINT_MAX (i.e., this shouldn't be caused