James Stone <stone1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > On Thu, Mar 11, 2004 at 06:21:15PM +0100, Frank Barknecht wrote: > > Another thing to check would be your X server's nice value. This used > > to be "-10" in older Debians, but should not be set at all with 2.6. > How disappointing.. I just tried this, and it didn't help.. I was almost > sure this was going to work. I am still getting many more xruns than > with the low latency 2.4.x kernels though at least I am not getting > xruns on opening and closing windows! > > However, on doing a top in 2.6.x I noticed that quite a few processes > are running with a nice of -10 (something called "event" among > others..). This does not appear to be the case in 2.4.x.. perhaps this > could be the source of the trouble.. not really sure how to fix it > though. This makes me wonder if there is a bug in the scheduler. IIUC, a realtime thread is *supposed* to have higher priority than any non-SCHED_FIFO thread, regardless of "nice" value. If we can nail down a case where this is definitely happening, someone should report it to Andrew Morton. > I will have to stick with 2.4.25 for the time being by the looks of > things. You can almost certainly get better low-latency results that way, at least for the moment. I hope that over time 2.6.x will become just as good. -- joq
