[linux-audio-user] Re: Recent LKML discussion on preempt/latency in 2.6 kernels

[Ross Vandegrift]

On Tue, Mar 23, 2004 at 11:44:24AM +0100, Kjetil Svalastog Matheussen wrote:
> This is very interesting. It says that preempt have no influence
> on the worst-case latency. In other words, this means that
> preempt in theory is useless regarding use of realtime audio.

Has anyone tried audio work with 2.6 and preempt *off*?  I've been using
2.6 some, with preempt on and I'm seeing exactly the same kind of
behaviour as the original email in the thread reports - compiles take
twice as long and disk latency kills interactivity whenever something
loads a program/file.  I basically went back to 2.4+lowlatency for audio
work, but I wonder if anyone's tried 2.6 without preempt?


-- 
Ross Vandegrift
ross at willow.seitz.com

A Pope has a Water Cannon.                               It is a Water Cannon.
He fires Holy-Water from it.                        It is a Holy-Water Cannon.
He Blesses it.                                 It is a Holy Holy-Water Cannon.
He Blesses the Hell out of it.          It is a Wholly Holy Holy-Water Cannon.
He has it pierced.                It is a Holey Wholly Holy Holy-Water Cannon.
He makes it official.       It is a Canon Holey Wholly Holy Holy-Water Cannon.
Batman and Robin arrive.                                       He shoots them.