Linux + SDL + Alsa. [Solved(?)]

Post by **grinvader** » Tue Dec 07, 2004 6:16 pm

phibxr wrote:Are you using ALSA and SDL together? It seems to work just fine with OSS, so those using OSS won't ever notice.

I'm using ALSA, and I have this 'asking for 2000, getting 2048' line, but I don't have any major sound trouble once I kill everything using CPU.

phibxr · Post by **phibxr** » Tue Dec 07, 2004 6:38 pm

grinvader wrote:
phibxr wrote:Are you using ALSA and SDL together? It seems to work just fine with OSS, so those using OSS won't ever notice.
I'm using ALSA, and I have this 'asking for 2000, getting 2048' line, but I don't have any major sound trouble once I kill everything using CPU.

Do you think you could post your SDL-version, ALSA-version, soundcard and distribution? I've tried ZSNES on six different systems, ranging from an AMD K6/2 450mhz to an Intel somewhere around ~2.4ghz, all running different distributions of linux, always getting the same result.

Post by **Nach** » Tue Dec 07, 2004 7:17 pm

I'm not sure what I'm using, I think it's OSS, and I had sound jerkiness till some recent changes.

Post by **grinvader** » Tue Dec 07, 2004 7:21 pm

gentoo linux 2.4.26-r12
libsdl 1.2.7-r3
alsa-lib 1.0.6, alsa-oss 1.0.6 too.
alsa-driver 1.0.6a
P4 1.8GHz 448MB ram
Soundcard... creative ensoniq thingy don't remember exactly

phibxr · Post by **phibxr** » Tue Dec 07, 2004 7:34 pm

grinvader wrote:gentoo linux 2.4.26-r12
libsdl 1.2.7-r3
alsa-lib 1.0.6, alsa-oss 1.0.6 too.
alsa-driver 1.0.6a
P4 1.8GHz 448MB ram
Soundcard... creative ensoniq thingy don't remember exactly

Hmm. Those specs resemble mine very much. The only difference is in the kernel version. I use 2.6.9.

noob saibot · Post by **noob saibot** » Wed Dec 15, 2004 3:17 am

Just wanted to say that I had been having the same problem described in this thread, and using the source provided by deathpudding seems to have fixed it entirely. Now I can finally move on from 1.36.

Post by **grinvader** » Wed Dec 15, 2004 11:26 am

I'm gonna try this patch and if it doesn't break anything, I'll commit it to cvs...

phibxr · Post by **phibxr** » Mon Dec 20, 2004 9:17 pm

That sounds wonderful indeed. Has it been committed yet?

phibxr · Post by **phibxr** » Wed Jan 05, 2005 2:05 am

It didn't seem to be in the release. Any news?

Post by **grinvader** » Wed Jan 05, 2005 5:58 am

The sound code was reverted. The 1.36 code is used in v1.40.

You can check here.

phibxr · Post by **phibxr** » Wed Jan 05, 2005 7:36 am

grinvader wrote:The sound code was reverted. The 1.36 code is used in v1.40.

You can check here.

That's true. I'll recompile it and check it again.

Oh, by the way - could anyone explain what the patched code really (un)does? To me it seems like it only reduces the size of the buffer.

And, I almost forgot, many thanks to those who found out how to patch this and to grinvader for committing the patch.

Post by **grinvader** » Wed Jan 05, 2005 4:45 pm

I didn't commit it - thank nach, he's the man.

Post by **Nach** » Wed Jan 05, 2005 5:11 pm

phibxr wrote: Oh, by the way - could anyone explain what the patched code really (un)does? To me it seems like it only reduces the size of the buffer.

Read this: http://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.ph ... tid=319677

phibxr · Post by **phibxr** » Wed Jan 05, 2005 5:16 pm

Nach wrote:
phibxr wrote: Oh, by the way - could anyone explain what the patched code really (un)does? To me it seems like it only reduces the size of the buffer.
Read this: http://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.ph ... tid=319677

Thanks for committing the patch, Nach. You're the man. ;)