[LAD] tschack ... early version of smp enabled jack1

[Jörn Nettingsmeier]

sorry about the previous bogus message, i fat-fingered the rewrap 
button... :(

On 01/27/2010 09:11 PM, Stéphane Letz wrote:
>
> Le 27 janv. 2010 à 21:02, Jörn Nettingsmeier a écrit :

>> i didn't think too much about jack2's apparent overhead, since it
>> has the benefit of scaling to smp, which usually affects the
>> single-processor case (my box is a single-core amd64). it would be
>> interesting to see if torben's approach is able to deliver the same
>> latencies as jack1, while adding smp support.

> Well "jack2's apparent overhead," is something new for me, and would
> require some deeper test/feedback to understand better. Moreover
> without more precise description of xruns occurrence (at what DSP CPU
> does it start to happen.. etc..) , what kind of setup (jack2 version,
> jack configuration, applications used....), it is again hard to
> understand/correct things.

well, as i said, it was nothing really conclusive (i'm not going to 
waste much time to go from 128/2 to 64/2, diminishing returns...), and 
my box is generally under-powered for what i do with it.

in short, i figured it's not significant really. i merely added this 
here in case there's a general picture emerging... it wasn't even 
intended as criticism.

and even if it turned out jack2 would be one step worse than jack1, 
that's not at all a big price to pay for smp imho. same with the kernel: 
an smp build does degrade performance on an up box, but who cares, 
really? you can't even buy up workstations any more, and nature dictates 
that single-core performance has hit its limit...

luck has it that my mobo just got fried, so chances are i'll be 
contributing some nice quad-core data in the near future - if only my 
customers paid their bills on time...


best,

jörn