On 3/2/07, Michael K. Edwards <medwards.linux@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 3/2/07, Lee Revell <rlrevell@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > nice -n -20 arecord | nice -n -20 aplay should work also... > > Actually, no, it doesn't. Negative nice levels are no substitute for > SCHED_FIFO priority -- not if you care about controlled end-to-end > latency. > > > Of course you have to pass additional arguments to aplay and arecord > > to set the format (-f cd or -f dat) as they default to 8Khz mono. > > Sample aplay -C | aplay -P incantation posted along with the > sched_fifo patch a week or so ago. Your patch is useful but not mergeable as is. Can you please remove the stdout->stderr stuff, add a command line switch to make SCHED_FIFO optional rather than setting it unconditionally, to accept the RT priority as an argument rather than hardcoding it, and to check the return value of sched_setscheduler()? Lee ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys-and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV _______________________________________________ Alsa-devel mailing list Alsa-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/alsa-devel
