It will not assist with any audio delays arising from any of the Apps built into your TV. I hope that information assists and gives you a way to resolve the lip-sync delays, but note the Arcana will only work for the connected devices, like your PS5, or cable TV box. There are numerous TV audio extractors and splitters mentioned in many threads on this forum, but if looking to pass-though (split/extract) ‘Dolby Atmos’ audio to the Beam (gen2) then I would suggest perhaps looking into the option of using the HDFury Arcana, or other ‘similar’ audio extractor/pass-through devices that can handle that type of audio format. If your TV is not able to do these things with its connected devices, then I suggest perhaps looking at the option of using an audio splitter/extractor, which takes the audio from such devices and extracts and splits it off to the Sonos Receiver and by-passes the TV/ports altogether and eradicates any delays usually caused by the TV/Processor/Ports. so that the TV itself, effectively lets the audio bypass (pass-through) the TV, without it being processed. Some TV manufacturers have resolved these type of issues in a variety of different ways by increasing the abilities of their TV models with faster processors and introducing such features as lip-sync tools (usually available in the TV sound-out settings), but most TV brands seem to now be using ‘audio pass-through’ for connected devices like the PlayStation, XBox, Apple TV, Fire-stick etc. The issue is what is happening to the audio before it arrives at the connected HT device that is causing the delays here and lip-sync issues? by comparing iostat output during runs) to get a better idea of what's going on.Sonos devices are not in a position to fix a delay in receiving the ‘processed’ audio from a TV - All the Sonos Home Theatre devices (should) do play the audio as soon as it arrives, with virtually little, or no, buffering involved and no transcoding. Really we would need to see how the I/O was leaving the bottom of the kernel (e.g. It's hard to tell for sure what's going on though. You'll likely trigger splitting but due to memory requirements on O_DIRECT the splitting points may lead to smaller I/Os than the above cases. In your case a bs that huge is nonsensical with odirect as your "disk"'s maximum transfer block size (let alone the optimal size) is almost certainly smaller. When you specify oflag=odirect you are saying "trust that all my parameters are sensible and turn off as much kernel buffering as you can". ![]() Since you are sending only one giant write this will put you into near enough the same scenario as doing conv=fdatasync above. ![]() Oflag=dsync is still allowed to make use of kernel buffering - it just causes a flush+wait for completion after each submission. Only when dd has finished sending ALL the data will it have to wait for anything still only in cache to be flushed to disk (and with fsync that includes any metadata). ![]() This gives the kernel a big opportunity to merge I/Os, create parallel submission out of I/O that has yet to be destaged and generally decouples I/O submission to the kernel from I/O acceptance by the disk (to the extent that buffering will allow). Dd with oflag=dsync or conv=fdatasync/fsync is around 10 times faster than dd with oflag=directĬonv=fdatasync / conv=fsync still mean I/O is initially queued to the kernel cache and destaged to disk as the kernel sees fit.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |