Open
Conversation
added 2 commits
July 29, 2016 12:34
- divertReadLoop just puts packets on the queue - divertClockLoop takes packets off the queue and processes them
In particular, 'lag' now indicates that it wants to be rescheduled in time to send lagged packets
Owner
|
Great I'll be checking this out tomorrow when I get home :) |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
The motivation here is that I want to be able to apply quite low amounts of lag, and variation in lag - and in the current code the value of
CLOCK_WAITMSat 40ms, and the associatedSleep(), is high enough to prevent this from being accurate.Eg if I set lag to 50ms, what I actually see is lag varying from 50-90ms.
So what I've done is this:
lagnow indicates when it would like to be rescheduled to send lagged packets - rather than having to wait and be up toCLOCK_WAITMSlateThis version of the pull request is against master - if you take #33, then there's a trivial one-line change needed to
lags calculation of the delay. I'd be happy to re-submit this one after #33 is merged, if that's more convenient.