![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
>> > If you have sound device without this soft mixing is moved to user space >> > .. but applications do not need know about this even now because all >> > neccessary details are handled on library level. Is it ? >> > So question is: why the hell *ALL* mixing details are not moved to kernel >> > space to SIMPLE and NOT GROWING abstraction ? >> >> Because many people believe that the softmix in the kernel space is >> evil. >> >This is the usual argument against kernel level mixing. Somebody has once >said that all this is evil. However this is not necessarily correct. > I'm going with "is evil". Better let userspace have a segfault than a kernel oops. I am having quite a moody feeling when running even my own things like http://alphagate.hopto.org/quad_dsp/ >Kernel mixing is not rocket science. All you need to do is picking a >sample from the output buffers of each of the applications, sum them >together (with some volume scaling) and feed the result to the physical >device. Ok, handling different sample formats/rates makes it much more >difficult but that could be done in the library level. Jan Engelhardt -- - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ | ||||||||||||
| Last update: 2006-01-06 07:50 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||||