On Mon, Dec 22, 2003 at 10:11:00PM +0100, Florian Schmidt wrote: > Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > > The objective in 2.6 is that the preemptible kernel achieve similar > > worst-case latencies to the low-latency-patched kernel. So 2.6 should > > meet your requirements out of the box. That seems to say that (apart from the VM problem he mentioned) 2.6.0 should in fact perform as well (xrun-wise) as patched 2.4.x, but I thought some people here have found that it doesn't. Now I'm back at home (I posted earlier from work) I find that my kernel that dropped chunks of audio was in fact 2.4.22, not 2.4.20. Rather than upgrade that to 2.4.23 I've downloaded 2.6.0. This could be quite an ambitious project for me, as I'll take the opportunity to use the built-in ALSA drivers to replace the current OSS, and find out whether they support the S/PDIF input of my M-Audio DIO 2448. Not to mention all the other things that will be different - having once been a contented Debian stable user the air seems to getting thin now. > > (The inode reclaim problem is fairly complex, but I just happen to see > > a patch from Dipankar Sarma in my inbox this morning which is designed > > to fix it up). Isn't open source wonderful! Thanks to all who posted and mailed other suggestions. If 2.6.0 breaks too many things I will be trying some of them... Cheers -- Anahata anahata@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx -+- http://www.treewind.co.uk Home: 01638 720444 Mob: 07976 263827
