Re: 96kHz 24bit WAV playback
Greg Wright <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.multimedia.helix.devel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
John Stirling wrote: > Hi Greg, > > Full log attached. > > The line - > audrend.cpp:WriteToAudioServices OK t=5720 > First, it would be helpful if the logs has timestamps at the beginning of each line (HX_TICKCOUNT()). This helps us track time between calls, which can point to certain problems. Next, from part of the log: audlinux_oss.cpp:_GetBytesActualyPlayed c=1483776 audlinux_oss.cpp:_GetBytesActualyPlayed c=1483776 audlinux_oss.cpp:_GetBytesActualyPlayed c=1497600 audlinux_oss.cpp:_GetBytesActualyPlayed c=1497600 wvffplin.cpp:GetPacket wvffplin.cpp:RIFFReadDone s=11520 st=5 286 df=(nil) wvffplin.cpp:RIFFReadDone ->PacketReady t=5700 audlinux_oss.cpp:_GetBytesActualyPlayed c=1497600 audrend.cpp:OnPacket to=0 t=5700 s=11520 audlinux_oss.cpp:_GetBytesActualyPlayed c=1497600 audlinux_oss.cpp:_SyncUpTimeStamps c=0 audlinux_oss.cpp:_GetBytesActualyPlayed c=1382400 audlinux_oss.cpp:_GetBytesActualyPlayed c=1382400 audlinux_oss.cpp:_GetBytesActualyPlayed c=1382400 audlinux_oss.cpp:_GetBytesActualyPlayed c=1396224 audlinux_oss.cpp:_GetBytesActualyPlayed c=1396224 audlinux_oss.cpp:_GetBytesActualyPlayed c=1396224 audlinux_oss.cpp:_GetBytesActualyPlayed c=1396224 audlinux_oss.cpp:_GetBytesActualyPlayed c=1400832 audlinux_oss.cpp:_GetBytesActualyPlayed c=1400832 audlinux_oss.cpp:_GetBytesActualyPlayed c=1400832 audlinux_oss.cpp:_GetBytesActualyPlayed c=1400832 audlinux_oss.cpp:_GetBytesActualyPlayed c=1400832 audlinux_oss.cpp:_GetBytesActualyPlayed c=1400832 audlinux_oss.cpp:_GetBytesActualyPlayed c=1400832 Why would GetBytesActualyPlayed() go backwards? 1497600-->1382400? Is any rebuffering going on, any pausing? In normal continuous playback, that should just be increasing. It is how we generate the timeline. I would certainly printout the values from getcurrenttime() and make sure it looks good, my guess is that it does not. Is there some bad math, due to 24 bits/sample, or perhaps some wrap around (INT overflow) happening in the OSS code? It should be easy to check. --greg.