2 Feb
2014
2 Feb
'14
1:09 p.m.
Jacob Erlbeck wrote:
dear jacob,
void tv_add_us(tv, usec) {
struct timeval foo;
foo.tv_sec = usec / 1000000;
foo.tv_usec = usec % 1000000;
timeradd(tv, &foo, tv);
}
Which I then would write as
tv_add_us(&rs->transmit.last_tv, USEC_20MS);
tv_add_us(&rs->transmit.last_tv, sample_diff_excess * USEC_SAMPLE);
And thanks to inlining the div/mod would vanish completely in the first
case and would be without extra cost in the second. So no performance
penalty but much better readability.
this makes sense. it simplifies things. i
implemented it. by getting rid
of negative usecs, there is no more issue about correctly decrementing
the timeval.
And did you understand the second application of
tv_add() at first
sight? It is correct but that is not obvious IMO.
the first implementation
increments last_tv by the duration of one
frame. (20ms) if too much time have been elapsed since when the last
frame has been processed, the last_tv is additionally incremented by the
duration of frames that have been missed since then. also the RTP
timestamp and sequence number is incremented accordingly.
holger mentioned that you also had a problem with speech frames in
conjunction with ipaccess BTS. was it a similar problem? how did you
solve this?
best regards,
andreas