Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261151AbVE1U5U (ORCPT ); Sat, 28 May 2005 16:57:20 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261157AbVE1U5U (ORCPT ); Sat, 28 May 2005 16:57:20 -0400 Received: from viper.oldcity.dca.net ([216.158.38.4]:37010 "HELO viper.oldcity.dca.net") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S261151AbVE1U5P (ORCPT ); Sat, 28 May 2005 16:57:15 -0400 Subject: Re: RT patch acceptance From: Lee Revell To: Andi Kleen Cc: Ingo Molnar , Sven-Thorsten Dietrich , dwalker@mvista.com, bhuey@lnxw.com, nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au, hch@infradead.org, akpm@osdl.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <20050528195546.GG86087@muc.de> References: <1117044019.5840.32.camel@sdietrich-xp.vilm.net> <20050526193230.GY86087@muc.de> <20050526200424.GA27162@elte.hu> <20050527123529.GD86087@muc.de> <20050527124837.GA7253@elte.hu> <20050527125630.GE86087@muc.de> <20050527131317.GA11071@elte.hu> <20050527133122.GF86087@muc.de> <20050527135310.GC16158@elte.hu> <20050528195546.GG86087@muc.de> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Sat, 28 May 2005 16:57:13 -0400 Message-Id: <1117313833.5423.20.camel@mindpipe> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.3.1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1601 Lines: 35 On Sat, 2005-05-28 at 21:55 +0200, Andi Kleen wrote: > On Fri, May 27, 2005 at 03:53:10PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > > * Andi Kleen wrote: > > > > > AFAIK the kernel has quite regressed recently, but that was not true > > > (for reasonable sound) at least for some earlier 2.6 kernels and some > > > of the low latency patchkit 2.4 kernels. > > > > (putting my scheduler maintainer hat on) was this under a stock !PREEMPT > > kernel? > > Yes. I did not run the numbers personally, but I was told 2.6.11+ > was already considerable worse for latency tests with jack than 2.6.8+ > (this was with vendor kernels in SUSE releases); and apparently > 2.6.8 was already worse than earlier 2.6.4/5 kernels or the later > and better 2.4s. CONFIG_PREEMPT in all cases did not change the > picture much. Sorry for being light on details; as I did > not run the tests personally. Um, that sounds 100% backwards. Starting around 2.6.8 the latency (as measured by the smallest usable jack buffer size) improved drastically with each release. Check the linux-audio-user or linux-audio-dev archives, many JACK users report that 2.6.10 or 2.6.11 is the first mainline kernel that gives acceptable performance at all. In fact, starting around 2.6.11 some pro audio users have been switching back from PREEMPT_RT to mainline as a result. Lee - 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/