[linux-audio-dev] another kernel patch?

[Jack O'Quin]

Roger Larsson <roger.larsson at norran.net> writes:

> > That's right.  But, Paul and I have been working closely with this and
> > don't have much faith in the correctness of the 2.4 scheduler.
> 
> Have you told kernel developers about this?
> This can be rather critical in embedded systems.

No.  It's rather difficult to prove.  There's no "smoking gun". 

But, I have no reason to believe that it works correctly, and I
suspect that it probably does not.

> > What problem does this solve?
> 
> It will better match what you think you do.
>
> When jackd writes in the FIFO - expect client to start.
> Jackd waits for baton - wait for client to finish.
> 
> But with jackd as highest priority:
> Jackd writes to FIFO - nothing will happen for client.
> Jackd _waits_ for baton - now client start, processes, finishes.

I don't see why this is a problem.  All this has to happen for every
cycle, anyway.  What difference does it make?  And, why do you think we
don't understand this?
-- 
  joq