Hi again, OOPS, I made lots of typos in that email this morning (please do send some coffee). I hope you understood the content of it anyway. If not: please excuse my sloppiness and read on: best, robin On 01/07/2011 02:43 PM, Robin Gareus wrote: > On 01/07/2011 01:32 PM, torbenh wrote: >> On Sun, Dec 12, 2010 at 07:22:28PM +0100, Jeremy Jongepier wrote: >>> On 12/12/2010 06:42 PM, Ronald Stewart wrote: >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> I would go with what Robin said. That being said, Robin's tweaks on >>>> Transmission last year on 89 set the pace for our build (brilliant!). Since >>>> then tuning jack2 (jackdmp) Rui's rtirq, plus tuning for specific chips / >>>> computer hardware makes a difference. If you want something now that truly >>>> stands up and has had some of the best Linux developers touch the project, >>>> go with Transmission 4.2. I know Paul will jump in and tune us all up with >>>> our thoughts (go Paul!) but it should be stated again we are getting lights >>>> out performance without RT on our new multi-touch Tablets for Pro Audio with >>>> 2.6.35, Meego/AtomN450. >>> >>> So with 2.6.35 rtirq also works with a non real-time kernel? >> >> i am not aware of normal kernels having threaded irq handlers. > > No it they do not. The vanilla kernel (<=2.6.37 - currently latest version) has no threaded IRQ handlers and does not support rtirq. >> additionally jack2 does not mlockall clients. > > If the machine as enough RAM or no SWAP partition this won't be a problem. s/as/has/ > The ability to distribute audio load over multiple CPU cores is a big > pro. (tschak was not packaged when building the Transmission disto and > we were somewhat conservative, as well). s/tschak/tschack/ >> so basically i would say, that this configuration works is pretty much >> luck. > > Vanilla kernels > 2.6.33 do offer great overall performance: smooth > Destkop and acceptable audio performance. Peak performance is for sure > better than with the latest RT kernel (2.6.33.7.2-rt30). s/Destkop/Desktop/ > However that it works _reliable_ is indeed luck. > >> maybe robin can clarify this. > > I don't know the details for the new Indamixx tablets, maybe the > sound-card (and USB ports for external audio interfaces) are on a > dedicated IRQ (they were not on the first generation Indamixx netbooks: > the audio IRQ was shared with the graphics card and WiFi; a RT kernel > and rtirq was pretty much a requirement) > > I don't think reliable low latency is a major goal for Indamixx. Most > use-cases are quite fine with high latency that can be compensated for. > > Also see an article I'm just writing with Luis: > http://wiki.linuxaudio.org/wiki/jack_latency_tests#does_latency_really_really_matter > > An occasional rare x-run is probably sth. Indamixx users can live with. > After all it is a portable studio, not something super-pro-high-end to > be mounted in a studio or used on-stage. Besides overall performance is > for sure better than on comparable windows products even without RT kernel. > > FWIW: Thomas Gleixer has announced that he's working on a RT patch for > 2.6.37 but there's no ETA. > > ciao, > robin > >>> Best, >>> >>> Jeremy >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Linux-audio-user mailing list >>> Linux-audio-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >>> http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user >> -- Robin Gareus web: http://gareus.org/ mail: robin@xxxxxxxxxx lab: http://citu.fr/ chat: xmpp:rgareus@xxxxx Public Key at http://pgp.mit.edu/ http://gareus.org/public.asc Fingerprint : 7107 840B 4DC9 C948 076D 6359 7955 24F1 4F95 2B42 _______________________________________________ Linux-audio-user mailing list Linux-audio-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
