[LAD] [LAU] Linux Audio 2012: Is Linux Audio moving forward?

Uwaysi Bin Kareem uwaysi.bin.kareem at paradoxuncreated.com
Thu Oct 18 08:07:57 UTC 2012

------- Forwarded message -------
From: "Uwaysi Bin Kareem" <uwaysi.bin.kareem at paradoxuncreated.com>
To: "Adrian Knoth" <adi at drcomp.erfurt.thur.de>
Subject: Re: [LAD] [LAU] Linux Audio 2012: Is Linux Audio moving forward?
Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2012 10:06:45 +0200

On Wed, 17 Oct 2012 17:58:33 +0200, Adrian Knoth
<adi at drcomp.erfurt.thur.de> wrote:

> On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 05:07:20PM +0200, Uwaysi Bin Kareem wrote:
>> http://paradoxuncreated.com/Blog/wordpress/?p=2268
> The site mentions:
> --- quote ---
>>   sudo schedtool -p 98 -n -20 -F `pgrep X`
> --- end quote ---
> Setting the X-server to FIFO/98 is just plain wrong, at least on an
> audio mailing list.
> And then:
> --- quotes ---
>> To go with this I also recommend, using the Ubuntu 2d desktop, as it has
>> low-jitter. Also the chromium-browser has low-jitter (better youtube).
> --- end quotes ---
> I have no idea what you're trying to prove here, but I'm pretty sure you
> have a general misunderstanding of jitter, thread wake-up latencies and
> proper scheduling priorities.

There seems to be a lot of misunderstandings about scheduling policies and
jitter out there. Howver if you want your desktop to slow down, simply by
moving another window, then leave it at normal. Jitter for audio seem
unaffected by this. The standard kernel seems to almost do 0.33 ms stable
on my HDA soundchip. A few clicks, and that is how it is with realtime X
aswell. So why not do it, even if audio is your main focus. X is
singlethreaded, so it needs to have data ready, for it`s windows or games.
Or else it becomes a bottleneck. Do whatever you want with this, but don`t
say it is wrong, or some kind of misunderstanding. I would not run a
desktop any other way.

Peace Be With You.

More information about the Linux-audio-dev mailing list