Kjetil Svalastog Matheussen <k.s.matheussen@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > My experience with 2.6, and also the impression I have got from reading > linux-audio-dev, is actually the opposite. The 2.6.0 kernel is worse > for multimedia work, because the latency is higher than 2.4.0 with the > low-latency patch. I don't know mathematical that this is correct, but it > seems so. This is my experience, too, comparing a 2.4 with low latency patches to an unpatched 2.6 kernel. To be fair, the unpatched 2.6 is a *lot* better than an unpatched 2.4, enough better to actually be usable for many purposes, but not good enough for serious low-latency audio. > Hopefully it is possible to make a low-latency patch for the 2.6 kernel as > well? This is definitely needed, IMHO. -- joq
