[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [fluid-dev] Thread safety long-term thoughts
Re: [fluid-dev] Thread safety long-term thoughts
Sat, 21 Nov 2009 19:22:27 +0100
Thunderbird 18.104.22.168 (X11/20090817)
Quoting David Henningsson <address@hidden>:
Btw; with the sample timers we also have the entire midi file player
(with its fopen calls etc) inside the audio thread. I'm guilty of that,
and it should be fixed by inserting a sequencer between the player and
the audio thread, at least in real-time use cases. Perhaps something
This scenario is less critical IMO, since the audio buffers could be
increased without issue (so what if the MIDI file plays 100ms later).
Good to know though. We may want FluidSynth to be smarter about
selecting default buffer sizes in the future, depending on the use case.
If someone is playing along with the midi track, they can't have high
latency. On the other hand, I think it is only between songs there is a
problem, the rest should not be very time-consuming.
And instead of creating shadow variables, all variables should belong
the state machine, unless explicitly needed by the voices directly.
For clarification: Shadow variables were provided in only 2 cases for
the purpose of returning the most recent value assigned when querying
their values. The shadow values are used when querying the value only.
The 2 cases are presets, since atomic operations can't be used in that
case (might be possible if there was preset reference counting) and
polyphony, since polyphony is accessed fairly often in the synthesis
thread and I thought it was better to shadow the value than have to
atomically read it every time and also deal with issues that might arise
if the value is changed while looping over voices.
In the case above, the current pitch bend controller current value
belongs to the state machine. The new value is sent to the audio
thread. Btw, if someone tries to read the current pitch bend controller
value just after having set it, will it work?
Yes it will work. As far as I know, all values which can be queried
should now work, as far as appearing immediately. For all parameters,
except presets and polyphony, the value is set and accessed atomically
by all threads.
If this includes the audio thread, don't we have a problem? If the value
is being read by the audio thread after being atomically set by the MIDI
thread(s), but before the corresponding event has arrived in the queue,
things will be incosistent?
(Perhaps this is not such a big issue for the pitch bend, but there
could be another events where this problem could hurt more?)
When an event occurs, it assigns the new value to the
parameter and sends an update event to the synthesis thread. The update
event does not contain the value, but just tells the synth thread to
update the parameter based on the latest value. If an event is set from
within the synth thread, its pretty much the same, except no queuing of
the update occurs.
Well it isn't just for garbage collection now. Its also being used to
handle program changes, which should happen ASAP.
Perhaps an option to let the libfluidsynth user call a function
periodically if he wants to skip the additional thread.
Eh? I had a look at that code and it seems to screw up fast-render and
embedded cases pretty bad, unless I'm missing something...?
Could we do something in create_audio_driver/delete_audio_driver to
register with the synth, and say that it is now operating with an audio
driver, and that means real-time operation? And if that is not the
case, handle events directly. Likewise, we could make the MIDI drivers
(and shell thread) register that we now have additional threads
referencing the state machine, so the state machine must be
Yeah, I think something like that could be good, rather than trying to
auto detect it. A simple API function like:
void fluid_synth_multi_thread_enable(fluid_synth_t *synth, int enable);
We have two kinds of multi-threading, a) we have an audio thread or we
don't, and b) we have either one, or more than one, thread accessing the
state machine. I think we should separate those cases if we made such an
And/Or, like I mentioned before, we could try to improve the
multi-thread use auto-detection.
I haven't fully looked into the
scenario, but if we made all the public API event functions
automatically enable multi-threading and then provide an alternative to
fluid_synth_handle_midi_event_noqueue() that might suffice and somewhat
Don't like it, I prefer configuring the use case via
fluid_synth_multi_thread_enable or something similar. If it is common
opinion that we expose too much of the internals, this approach won't
improve the situation.
(Note: potential screwup with libfluidsynth users creating their own
audio drivers, although I assume it was screwed up in 1.0.9 the same
way as well.)
In regards to thread safety you mean? As things are now, it just
assumes it is multi-threaded, which means slightly less efficiency.
I mean, if we were to change the assumption, we might have to look out
for that problem.
Btw, ready to release 1.1.1 anytime soon?
- [fluid-dev] Thread safety long-term thoughts, David Henningsson, 2009/11/16
- Re: [fluid-dev] Thread safety long-term thoughts, josh, 2009/11/16
- Re: [fluid-dev] Thread safety long-term thoughts, Ebrahim Mayat, 2009/11/17
- Re: [fluid-dev] Thread safety long-term thoughts, David Henningsson, 2009/11/18
- Re: [fluid-dev] Thread safety long-term thoughts, Ebrahim Mayat, 2009/11/18
- Re: [fluid-dev] Thread safety long-term thoughts, josh, 2009/11/18
- Re: [fluid-dev] Thread safety long-term thoughts, David Henningsson, 2009/11/19
- Re: [fluid-dev] Thread safety long-term thoughts, josh, 2009/11/19
- Re: [fluid-dev] Thread safety long-term thoughts,
David Henningsson <=
- Re: [fluid-dev] Thread safety long-term thoughts, josh, 2009/11/24
- Re: [fluid-dev] Thread safety long-term thoughts, David Henningsson, 2009/11/26
- Re: [fluid-dev] Thread safety long-term thoughts, josh, 2009/11/26