[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1277271419.10818.22.camel@obelisk.thedillows.org>
Date: Wed, 23 Jun 2010 01:36:59 -0400
From: David Dillow <dave@...dillows.org>
To: linux@...ou.dk
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, alsa-devel@...a-project.org
Subject: Re: PROBLEM: SIS7019 stops recording after 42 min
On Tue, 2010-06-22 at 23:00 -0400, David Dillow wrote:
> On Mon, 2010-06-21 at 22:10 +0200, Hans Schou wrote:
> > 2010/6/21 Hans Schou <linux@...ou.dk>:
> >
> > > I have just started:
> > > arecord -B 1000000 -F 500000 -c 1 -r 44100 -f S16 -M -D hw:0,0 -v arec.wav
> >
> > It gave a file size of 258822944 bytes. Almost 50 min:
> > echo "258822944/(2*60*44100)" | bc -ql
> > 48.90
> >
> > This is the longest recording I have made on this hardware.
> >
> > I have this running now:
> > + arecord -B 200000 -F 100000 -c 1 -r 44100 -f S16 -M -D hw:0,0 -v arec.wav
>
> Ok, it seems something is definately funky with the driver in general,
> and gets worse when we're using more than 2 periods per buffer.
The driver's funkiness may be limited to the more than 2 periods per
buffer/10 second pause issue.
> I don't have any overruns, nor does it go into the 10-second pause mode.
> I do see an odd alternating pattern of one period taking 1.4ms to
> capture, and the next taking 732ms. The period should be about 371ms, so
> the lumpyness of the timing is likely making it easier to hit overruns.
I can reproduce the alternating pattern of periods using a different
device, so this may be something in the core code of ALSA.
Hardware PCM card 0 'HDA Intel' device 0 subdevice 0
Its setup is:
stream : CAPTURE
access : RW_INTERLEAVED
format : S16_LE
subformat : STD
channels : 2
rate : 44100
exact rate : 44100 (44100/1)
msbits : 16
buffer_size : 32768
period_size : 16384
period_time : 371519
tstamp_mode : NONE
period_step : 1
avail_min : 16384
period_event : 0
start_threshold : 1
stop_threshold : 32768
silence_threshold: 0
silence_size : 0
boundary : 4611686018427387904
appl_ptr : 0
hw_ptr : 0
strace -T gives:
ioctl(4, 0x80184151, 0x7fff532cff70) = 0 <0.371672>
write(1, ..., 65536) = 65536 <0.000035>
ioctl(4, 0x80184151, 0x7fff532cff70) = 0 <0.742746>
write(1, ..., 65536) = 65536 <0.000013>
ioctl(4, 0x80184151, 0x7fff532cff70) = 0 <0.000027>
write(1, ..., 65536) = 65536 <0.000016>
ioctl(4, 0x80184151, 0x7fff532cff70) = 0 <0.742694>
write(1, ..., 65536) = 65536 <0.000011>
ioctl(4, 0x80184151, 0x7fff532cff70) = 0 <0.000038>
write(1, ..., 65536) = 65536 <0.000024>
ioctl(4, 0x80184151, 0x7fff532cff70) = 0 <0.742600>
The first period gets clocked out close to the expected time --
371.672ms actual vs 371.519 ms expected -- but then we're either running
almost a full buffer -- 742.746ms actual vs 743.038ms buffer -- or very,
very short at 0.027ms.
Since this problem is not related to the SiS7019 driver, I'll leave it
to later -- or for others to investigate. Using three periods per buffer
sees a similar pattern, but one has an extra period time to work
within.
Dave
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists