Re: [LAD] jack_ringbuffer or port_buffer ?

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
To: Paul Davis <paul@...>
Cc: <linux-audio-dev@...>
Date: Monday, May 18, 2009 - 1:21 pm

Am Montag, den 18.05.2009, 08:27 -0400 schrieb Paul Davis:

do I get it right, so, if there is no other thread then the
process_callback involved in the midi data collection,then there is no
need to use the ringbuffer ?

I talk about a audio2midi converter, it work nice with the
jack_ringbuffer, and also nice with the direct use from the port_buffer.
I try to figure out with on is best for this purpose, and didn't come to
a result. I think, the ringbuffer must use more CPU and mem, but I can`t
see it realy.
So when I get you right, I have no need to use the ringbuffer here ?

thanks
hermann

_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-dev

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
[LAD] jack_ringbuffer or port_buffer ?, hermann meyer, (Mon May 18, 7:42 am)
Re: [LAD] jack_ringbuffer or port_buffer ?, Paul Davis, (Mon May 18, 12:27 pm)
Re: [LAD] jack_ringbuffer or port_buffer ?, hermann meyer, (Mon May 18, 1:21 pm)
Re: [LAD] jack_ringbuffer or port_buffer ?, Gabriel M. Beddingfield, (Mon May 18, 1:45 pm)
Re: [LAD] jack_ringbuffer or port_buffer ?, Paul Davis, (Mon May 18, 1:32 pm)
Re: [LAD] jack_ringbuffer or port_buffer ?, hermann meyer, (Mon May 18, 1:40 pm)