Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S263618AbUJ2VxD (ORCPT ); Fri, 29 Oct 2004 17:53:03 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S263615AbUJ2VuY (ORCPT ); Fri, 29 Oct 2004 17:50:24 -0400 Received: from mx2.elte.hu ([157.181.151.9]:18663 "EHLO mx2.elte.hu") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S263524AbUJ2VpE (ORCPT ); Fri, 29 Oct 2004 17:45:04 -0400 Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 23:46:02 +0200 From: Ingo Molnar To: Lee Revell Cc: Florian Schmidt , Paul Davis , Thomas Gleixner , LKML , mark_h_johnson@raytheon.com, Bill Huey , Adam Heath , Michal Schmidt , Fernando Pablo Lopez-Lezcano , Karsten Wiese , jackit-devel , Rui Nuno Capela Subject: Re: [Fwd: Re: [patch] Real-Time Preemption, -RT-2.6.9-mm1-V0.4] Message-ID: <20041029214602.GA15605@elte.hu> References: <20041029170237.GA12374@elte.hu> <20041029170948.GA13727@elte.hu> <20041029193303.7d3990b4@mango.fruits.de> <20041029172151.GB16276@elte.hu> <20041029172243.GA19630@elte.hu> <20041029203619.37b54cba@mango.fruits.de> <20041029204220.GA6727@elte.hu> <20041029233117.6d29c383@mango.fruits.de> <20041029212545.GA13199@elte.hu> <1099086166.1468.4.camel@krustophenia.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1099086166.1468.4.camel@krustophenia.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i X-ELTE-SpamVersion: MailScanner 4.31.6-itk1 (ELTE 1.2) SpamAssassin 2.63 ClamAV 0.73 X-ELTE-VirusStatus: clean X-ELTE-SpamCheck: no X-ELTE-SpamCheck-Details: score=-4.9, required 5.9, autolearn=not spam, BAYES_00 -4.90 X-ELTE-SpamLevel: X-ELTE-SpamScore: -4 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1006 Lines: 25 * Lee Revell wrote: > On Fri, 2004-10-29 at 23:25 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > will do so. btw: i think i'm a bit confused right now. What debugging > > > features should i have enabled for this test? > > > > this particular one (atomicity-checking) is always-enabled if you have > > the -RT patch applied (it's a really cheap check). > > One more question, what do you recommend the priorities of the IRQ > threads be set to? AIUI for xrun-free operation with JACK, all that > is needed is to set the RT priorities of the soundcard IRQ thread > highest, followed by the JACK threads, then the other IRQ threads. Is > this correct? correct. softirqs are not used by the sound subsystem so there's no ksoftirqd dependency. Ingo - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/