Il 09/10/2013 20:49, Hans de Goede ha scritto: >> >> I wonder whether it's meant to be 1 millisecond or 1 microsecond? > > Maybe once it was 1 ms, this code just exists to keep the buffers > of a soundcard filled / emptied in time. 100 times / second is more > then plenty for that, so that is what I'm going to use in the patch I'm > about to submit.
It was 1 ms when that was the resolution of the "alarm tick" (which was based on /dev/rtc or /dev/hpet), then it became 250 us with "dynamic ticks", then we know how it became 0 (1 ns after timer_mod is effectively 0 ns after select). Paolo
