[linux-audio-user] Kernel 2.4 low-latency patches -- combining?

[Eric Dantan Rzewnicki]

My understanding is that it is best to apply both. I have run both the 
preempt and lowlatency patches on kernels ranging from 2.4.16 ( at least 
, probably earlier) through 2.4.22 with very good results.

In the 2.6.x kernel series both sets of patches are included as 
standard. Most of the lowlatency patches (if i understand correctly) 
were merged into the 2.6.1 code base. The preempt patch has been in the 
kernel as a configuration option since sometime in the 2.5.x development 
series.

-Eric Rz


Chris Metzler wrote:
> Hi.  I've read the stuff on the LAD website about the two low-latency
> patch options for the 2.4 kernels -- Robert Love's preempt patch and
> Andrew Morton's low-latency patch.  Each are described as having
> good and bad points in comparison.  The way in which it's discussed
> seems to suggest that one should choose one or the other; nowhere is
> discussed whether it's a good or bad idea to apply both.  But that
> seems to be possible; the Debian package page for AM's low-latency
> kernel patch indicates that it's compatible with the preempt patch.
> 
> So I guess I'm looking for advice about this.  Are they indeed
> compatible?  Is there some reason why applying *both* would be a bad
> thing?
> 
> Thanks for any info.
> 
> -c
>