[LAU] rt-patch vs cgroups approach

[Paul Davis]

On Mon, Feb 3, 2014 at 3:38 PM, F Tux <federicogalland at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi all!
>
> In the past few months I've been fiddling with the kernel config to
> get the best latency out of my laptop (core2 t6400, 2GHz 1MB L2, 4GB
> of RAM).
> The best settings I've got so far are 128*3 with a sample rate of
> 48000Hz. All of this with the rt-patch and following the guide in the
> linux audio wiki.
>
> My question is regarding the method described here
>
> http://proaudio.tuxfamily.org/wiki/index.php?title=DAW_Digital_Audio_Workstation#Instructions_for_3.x_Kernels
>
> I've seen this described in many a forum, and people say they got
> better results with it than with the rt-patch.
>
> Do you have any experiences with the cgroups solution? Is it stable
> enough for live performance?
>
> I will be testing it some time in the future, but I thought it would
> be a good idea to fire up the discussion here and make it for a common
> profit.
>
> Thanks a lot to all of you. It's great to know there's a place for the
> really independent musician to learn and share for free with his
> fellow hackers around the globe.
>

as jeremy hinted, cgroups and the RT patch are 100% orthogonal.

The RT patch is way to improve scheduling latencies.

The cgroup mechanism is a way to control access to realtime scheduling.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxaudio.org/pipermail/linux-audio-user/attachments/20140203/c22e0a1e/attachment.html>