On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 3:16 AM, Simon Wise <simonzwise@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
on modern systems this is unlikely to be the case any more. (a) multicore (b) kernel mechanisms to reserve a (small) fraction of available CPU for non-RT tasks.
On 19/02/13 04:36, jonetsu@xxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:aside from the other things mentioned there is a trade-off between GUI responsiveness and audio latency ... if you do the full rt-audio set-up then the programs you set as very high priority can easily lock everything else out. T
If a better response time from the kernel is something that's Good, why isn't
lowlatency kernels a default in Linux distros (well, at least in Linux Mint and
Fedora) If it is So Good, what are the arguments for not having a lowlatency
kernel by default ? Any drawbacks ? I presume the Audio-oriented Linux distros
do have lowlatency kernels by default, do they ?
on modern systems this is unlikely to be the case any more. (a) multicore (b) kernel mechanisms to reserve a (small) fraction of available CPU for non-RT tasks.
_______________________________________________ Linux-audio-user mailing list Linux-audio-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
