Linux-audio-dev

linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org

7516 discussions

Re: [LAD] [LAU] [ANN] lv2fil version 2.0 "New hope" released

by Nedko Arnaudov

Ken Restivo <ken(a)restivo.org> writes: > Now all we need is a parametric EQ that allows one to click on the > curves and put dots ... [snip] ... It is planned but I dont consider it that important so it will probably not happen (soon) unless somewhat with pygtk and cairo skills contributes. -- Nedko Arnaudov <GnuPG KeyID: DE1716B0>

16 years, 4 months

[ANNOUNCE] Safe real-time on the desktop by default; Desktop/audio RT developers, read this!

by Lennart Poettering

Heya, Just a quick announcement: I just moved into Fedora Rawhide a little daemon called "RealtimeKit" which will be enabled by default, and since it is now a dependency of PulseAudio and things work how they work this will then not only be available in Fedora 12 but also sooner or later in the other distributions as well, installed by default. So what does this do? It's a simple policy daemon that hands out SCHED_RR scheduling to normal user processes/threads that ask for it. So what's so fancy about it? Nothing. Except that is hopefully a good solution for handing out RT scheduling and is also actually secure. What's wrong with using RLIMIT_RPRIO? The simple fact that we cannot enable that by default since it basically empowers the user to freeze the machine. Also, asking the user to edit /etc/security/limits.conf is certainly not user-friendly. We want to enable RT scheduling for media aplications out-of-the-box. But what's wrong with relying on RLIMIT_RTTIME? Being a process limit it can very easily be circumvented for freezing the machine by combining an RT busy loop with a fork bomb. But what's wrong with relying on on a canary watchdog to avoid freezing systems? It's racy: an evildoer could fork more quickly than the canary watchdog daemon could demote its children. So a canary is not really a protection against a frozen system. Why not use cgroups for this? Because it's simply a horrible API, and using this for media applications has non-obvious consequences on using cgroups for their originally intended purpose -- which are containers. So what does RealtimeKit do that previous solutions didn't do? rtkit relies on a new kernel feature SCHED_RESET_ON_FORK that got recently merged into Ingo's tree and will hence shortly appear in 2.6.31. You can set that flag when entering SCHED_RR scheduling and this will then make sure that after forking a child will be reset to SCHED_OTHER. RT fork bombs can thus be made impossible: if we hand out RT to a process we can be sure it won't "leak", and if we decide to take it away again we can be sure we can do that without having to be afraid of races around forking. rtkit enforces limits on the the number of threads/processes/users that get RT sched. It also does rate limiting, and calls into PolicyKit before handing out RT. Finally, as extra a-posteriori protection it also includes a canary watchdog. So what does that mean for you? If you don't do RT development or doing RT development only for embedded cases, or if you are a Gentoo-Build-It-All-Myself-Because-It-Is-So-Much-Faster-And-Need-To-Reinvent-The-Wheel-Daily-And-Configurating-Things-Is-Awesome-Guy then it doesn't mean anything for you. However, if you are a desktop developer interested to get your stuff working out-of-the-box on modern distributions then you should think about calling into RealtimeKit for acquiring RT scheduling. RealtimeKit has a trivial API, to make a thread SCHED_RR it's just one D-Bus method you need to call. You can either code that call yourself or alternatively just copy the reference client implementation rtkit includes into your sources: http://git.0pointer.de/?p=rtkit.git;a=blob;f=rtkit.h http://git.0pointer.de/?p=rtkit.git;a=blob;f=rtkit.c For more information see this: http://git.0pointer.de/?p=rtkit.git;a=blob;f=README So yepp, it would be great if folks would adopt this in their apps, so that a user doesn't need to know about all those Unix intricacies such as resource limits and so on, but still get good perfomance in his media applications by default. This is now in Fedora Rawhide which will still take a few months to be released as F12. The other distros probably need a bit more time for this. This means this is not a burning issue yet, so this is mostly intended as a heads-up right now. Unless of course you are one of those cool dudes who are living on the bleeding edge. Packagers, you might want to steal this .spec file for you work: http://cvs.fedoraproject.org/viewvc/devel/rtkit/rtkit.spec?revision=1.1&vie… Questions? Lennart -- Lennart Poettering Red Hat, Inc. lennart [at] poettering [dot] net http://0pointer.net/lennart/ GnuPG 0x1A015CC4

16 years, 4 months

SynthForge - new modular synth builder

by Damon Chaplin

Hi, I've been working on a modular synth builder for a while and I've just put the first release up on SourceForge: http://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?group_id=262459&package_id=322… (It requires slv2, GooCanvas 0.14, and the ladspa-swh-plugins if you want to build it.) There are also some screenshots here (the second one shows the created synth in use): https://sourceforge.net/project/screenshots.php?group_id=262459 This is all pre-alpha stuff so don't expect it to work that well yet (or even compile easily!). It can only create fairly basic synths at present. I could do with some help checking over the basic architecture and prioritising future work, so join the mailing list on sourceforge if you want to get involved. Damon

16 years, 4 months

Re: [LAD] RFC: Default discovery paths for LADSPA, LRDF, LV2 and DSSI (and more?)

by Jeff McClintock

> > Windows (i.e. "%ProgramFiles%\LADSPA Plugins\rdf"). ?Not that I > > generally build with LRDF support on Windows anyway. > > This makes sense to me, if only it could be made "official"... > (windows paths too) Windows has official rules for this. Users are no longer allowed to add random files to an application's directory in "/Program Files/Appname". Permissions are set to prevent it and that directory is virtualized to prevent it. The exception is - Applications can install their own bundled plugins in "/Program Files/Appname" at install time only (because the installer has elevated privilege). User installed plugins go in CSIDL_PROGRAM_FILES_COMMON , e.g. typically "C:\Program Files\Common Files\LADSPA Plugins..." Best Regards, Jeff McClintock

16 years, 4 months

[LAA] [ANN] guitarix-0.04.6-1 release

by hermann meyer

guitarix is a simple Linux Rock Guitar amplifier and is designed to achieve nice thrash/metal/rock/blues guitar sounds. Guitarix uses the Jack Audio Connection Kit as its audio backend and brings in one input and two output ports to the jack graph. Release 0.04.6-1 comes with some major changes: * Build environment and source code changes: - use of the python based waf build system. - use of the boost library for command line options. - various code cleanups and source tree restructuring All this has been done by our new project member James Warden. * Audio effect and modeling: - new tube model - fuzz Please read the README for more details regarding the new build process and the command line options. have fun ________________________________________________________________________ The standalone version of guitarix is based on GTK2+. But guitarix is also released as a suite of LADSPA plugins and can be used in e.g. ardour. guitarix is licensed under the GPL. Project page with screenshots: http://guitarix.sourceforge.net/ download: http://sourceforge.net/projects/guitarix/ For capture, guitarix uses the external application 'jack_capture' (version >= 0.9.30) written by Kjetil S. Matheussen. If you don't have it installed, you can look here: http://old.notam02.no/arkiv/src/?M=D For extra Impulse Responses, guitarix uses the convolution application 'jconv' created by Fons Adriaensen. If you don't have it installed, you can look here: http://www.kokkinizita.net/linuxaudio/index.html I(hermann) use faust to build the prototype and will say thanks to : Julius Smith http://ccrma.stanford.edu/realsimple/faust/ : Albert Graef http://www.musikwissenschaft.uni-mainz.de/~ag/ag.html : Yann Orlary http://faust.grame.fr/ regards hermann & James

16 years, 4 months

Re: [LAD] palm pre [was Re: [ANNOUNCE] Safe real-time on thedesktop by default; Desktop/audio RT developers, read this!]

by James Warden

oops, yeah, wrong discussion thread :) I'm a coder too but not at all in linux-audio, although I started designing a few applications (nothing around DSP or linux core system, kernel, etc, this is way beyond my understanding at the moment. FYI, the closest thing to kernel stuff I did lately was patching oss2jack and kfusd so that this rather obsolete tool could run against kernel 2.6.29). But yes, I wanted to bring a user's point of view to the LAD discussion. About the dual boot, I don't know if it's the best solution but it is certainly a compromise. And one that I would not do myself. I tend to build my own PCs from various components for specific tasks. I find this process cheaper and feel I have a better control over its functioning / etc. About KDE, I am not particularly fond of it, it's just an old habit. I could never get used to gnome although it looks like a fine WM as well. I tried other stuff as well but in the end, I always come back to the shell :) OK, I'll stop the OT blabla. J. --- On Wed, 6/24/09, Ralf Mardorf <ralf.mardorf(a)alice-dsl.net> wrote: > From: Ralf Mardorf <ralf.mardorf(a)alice-dsl.net> > Subject: Re: [LAD] palm pre [was Re: [ANNOUNCE] Safe real-time on thedesktop by default; Desktop/audio RT developers, read this!] > To: "James Warden" <warjamy(a)yahoo.com> > Cc: linux-audio-dev(a)lists.linuxaudio.org > Date: Wednesday, June 24, 2009, 8:05 AM > I dunno if you're a coder too, but > those words you wrote are the words of a user :). > > By the way I'm a fan of extremes, I like KDE (only with > KWin) ex 3.5.9 and Ion2, but actually I'm running GNOME and > this also has is advantages and disadvantages. > > Do you agree that a dual or multi boot might be the best > solution to fit to all needs? > > I would interpret your mail this way. You didn't blame any > sound server, but you make out for which usage you are fine > with which sound server. Am I wrong? > > The 'palm pre' thread is uncoupled from the origin thread, > that's why I guess it's okay to speak about user needs here, > nobody will disturb any technical expert knowledge > discussion at the original thread. > > By the way, an rt-audio distro like 64 Studio often works > OOB for rt-audio too, not for my hardware, but it is made to > fit to many hardware combinations. > > Thank you for reporting your experiences. > > Cheers, > Ralf > > James Warden wrote: > > Just a small comment, and then I shut up: > > > > the great thing about linux is its flexibility. I have > a few boxes at home doing different things: > > - a multimedia server based on mythtv, NFS and samba > > - a powerful DAW running an RT patched kernel > > - a couple of laptops for AOB (any other business) > > > > For the AOB laptops, it was nice not to do anything > once I installed the distro. Things worked OOB, and that was > it. > > > > For the DAW or multimedia server, that was another > story ... but simply because customized systems require, > well, customization. The all-in-one distro is and I think > will remain a utopia. > > This said, I recently upgraded my DAW to KDE 4.2 (was > 3.5.9 before upgrade) and that automatically installed > pulseaudio. I had already fiddled around with pulseaudio > about a year ago due to my using VirtualBox (another story). > I found pulse's features kinda cool and I quickly understood > it was not meant as a replacement or alternative to > Jack. > > As of today, my DAW has pulseaudio installed. But all > I had to do was: > > - open the KDE system settings - disable ALL sound > stuff I could find > > > > So basically, KDE offered me the possibility to not > interact at all with the sound layer. It was obviously not a > default setting but it was just a few clicks away. > > > > So let me be straight: it should remain like that. > > On average, a user installing e.g. KDE will expect > desktop sounds to work (sound notifications, mp3 players, > DVD playback, what-not). That's not what I want in my DAW at > all but being myself an old linux "power user", I knew that > it would do that (experience with artsd). I mean, how > could the KDE installation possibly know that it was to be > running on a DAW ?! :D I am glad the desktop config > interface allowed me to configure it the way I wanted (no > extra special services in the background, no sound system > other than what I want for my DAW). > > Now, if things were to change (no longer the > possibility to configure e.g. KDE the way I want), I would > definitely feel pissed-off and complain on some mailing > lists. But let's be also clear: pulseaudio is definitely NOT > the worst things that could happen. It works fine on my > laptops, I don't need to do anything about it and that's > what it was intended for: a generic and multifeatured > desktop sound system. But desktops are also used in other > contexts (e.g. DAW) and it would really be wise to keep > desktop components _optional_ (not only sound system but > also visual effects, etc). That's just simple wisdom and i > suggest we keep it that way. The same applies to jack. It is > a highly specialized tool and should remain so. > > > > > > OK, time to disappear from this discussion. > > > > Cheers, > > J. > > > > > > --- On Wed, 6/24/09, Ralf Mardorf <ralf.mardorf(a)alice-dsl.net> > wrote: > > > > > >> From: Ralf Mardorf <ralf.mardorf(a)alice-dsl.net> > >> Subject: Re: [LAD] palm pre [was Re: [ANNOUNCE] > Safe real-time on thedesktop by default; Desktop/audio RT > developers, read this!] > >> To: "james morris" <james(a)jwm-art.net> > >> Cc: linux-audio-dev(a)lists.linuxaudio.org > >> Date: Wednesday, June 24, 2009, 6:45 AM > >> james morris wrote: > >> > >>> On 24/6/2009, "Patrick Shirkey" <pshirkey(a)boosthardware.com> > >>> > >> wrote: > >> > >>> > >>>> It would be helpful if things that could > make a > >>>> > >> big impact will > >> > >>>> continued to be discussed within the LAD > >>>> > >> community. However this is a > >> > >>>> difficult situation. No matter if the > discussions > >>>> > >> are starting prior to > >> > >>>> implementation or post implementation the > general > >>>> > >> direction of the > >> > >>>> arguments tend to be quite emotional. > >>>> > >>>> Is it just because audio guys have a bit > more > >>>> > >> artistic temperament than > >> > >>>> most other developers? > >>>> > > >>> I don't think this adds much to what has been > stated > >>> > >> by Fons and others, > >> > >>> but perhaps it explains a little? > >>> > >>> I'm not a hardcore audio developer like most > of the > >>> > >> guys here, but I've > >> > >>> been making audio/music/noise, and coding, > since the > >>> > >> days of 486sx25s > >> > >>> and windows 3.1. Back then, and for many years > after, > >>> > >> it was a real > >> > >>> concern to be able to disable as many > irrelevant (to > >>> > >> audio) processes in > >> > >>> the system as possible (as I'm sure you're > aware). > >>> > >>> Now I have a pretty capable system, but when I > want to > >>> > >> run RT audio apps > >> > >>> I still want to disable as many irrelevant > processes > >>> > >> on the system as I > >> > >>> can. > >>> > >>> For this reason I really dislike the big > monolithic > >>> > >> desktop environments. > >> > >>> There are several applications tied into them > (some > >>> > >> serious, plain > >> > >>> useful, or just fun) which I'd love to have > working > >>> > >> but which force me > >> > >>> to install all sorts of software I really > don't want > >>> > >> or need - along > >> > >>> with all sorts of processes running in the > >>> > >> background. > >> > >>> So it feels a bit freedom eroding. The choice > seems to > >>> > >> be between a > >> > >>> system which 'just works' but which wastes > system > >>> > >> resources on things > >> > >>> I don't want, or a system which I have to > spend hours > >>> > >> setting up, > >> > >>> constantly have to deal with the > idiosyncrasies of, > >>> > >> but which is as fast > >> > >>> and powerful as it could be. > >>> > >>> The notions of old, to raise the potential for > system > >>> > >> resources to be > >> > >>> only used for the job at hand (ie audio) are > still > >>> > >> strongly rooted and > >> > >>> people don't like it when they feel their > freedom to > >>> > >> use systems in > >> > >>> this way is threatened by forcing them to > install > >>> > >> software and have > >> > >>> running processes they don't want. > >>> > >>> James. > >>> > >> I guess (if needed) separating rt and > bread-and-butter > >> Linux by having a dual-boot is an acceptable > solution. A user with nearly no > >> knowledge could install a comfortable distro for > the everyday desktop > >> environment and another for real-time usage. Even > if somebody don't > >> have any trouble with his Linux install, he might > wish to have a safe Linux > >> for productions and another Linux to have fun and > fun sometimes > >> means to risk things, you won't risk for a > installation that needs > >> to be stable all the time, that's why a dual-boot > has also an advantage, > >> if there will be a joint venture for distro/ > desktop developers and > >> rt hardliners. I have a bad mobo and for rt e.g. I > need to set > >> irq priority for especially the one port where the > MIDI is connected to. > >> I don't think things like that should be done by > the desktop > >> environment. This seems to be impossible. > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Linux-audio-dev mailing list > >> Linux-audio-dev(a)lists.linuxaudio.org > >> http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-dev > >> > >> > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Linux-audio-dev mailing list > > Linux-audio-dev(a)lists.linuxaudio.org > > http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-dev > > > > > > -- Secret of Tux: http://images.wallaceandgromit.com/user_uploads/forum_thumbnails/5/75/355.j… > "Gromit bit me" says HMV dog: http://img.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2007/03_03/GomitHMVPA_468x319.jpg > >

16 years, 4 months

Re: [LAD] palm pre [was Re: [ANNOUNCE] Safe real-time on thedesktop by default; Desktop/audio RT developers, read this!]

by James Warden

Just a small comment, and then I shut up: the great thing about linux is its flexibility. I have a few boxes at home doing different things: - a multimedia server based on mythtv, NFS and samba - a powerful DAW running an RT patched kernel - a couple of laptops for AOB (any other business) For the AOB laptops, it was nice not to do anything once I installed the distro. Things worked OOB, and that was it. For the DAW or multimedia server, that was another story ... but simply because customized systems require, well, customization. The all-in-one distro is and I think will remain a utopia. This said, I recently upgraded my DAW to KDE 4.2 (was 3.5.9 before upgrade) and that automatically installed pulseaudio. I had already fiddled around with pulseaudio about a year ago due to my using VirtualBox (another story). I found pulse's features kinda cool and I quickly understood it was not meant as a replacement or alternative to Jack. As of today, my DAW has pulseaudio installed. But all I had to do was: - open the KDE system settings - disable ALL sound stuff I could find So basically, KDE offered me the possibility to not interact at all with the sound layer. It was obviously not a default setting but it was just a few clicks away. So let me be straight: it should remain like that. On average, a user installing e.g. KDE will expect desktop sounds to work (sound notifications, mp3 players, DVD playback, what-not). That's not what I want in my DAW at all but being myself an old linux "power user", I knew that it would do that (experience with artsd). I mean, how could the KDE installation possibly know that it was to be running on a DAW ?! :D I am glad the desktop config interface allowed me to configure it the way I wanted (no extra special services in the background, no sound system other than what I want for my DAW). Now, if things were to change (no longer the possibility to configure e.g. KDE the way I want), I would definitely feel pissed-off and complain on some mailing lists. But let's be also clear: pulseaudio is definitely NOT the worst things that could happen. It works fine on my laptops, I don't need to do anything about it and that's what it was intended for: a generic and multifeatured desktop sound system. But desktops are also used in other contexts (e.g. DAW) and it would really be wise to keep desktop components _optional_ (not only sound system but also visual effects, etc). That's just simple wisdom and i suggest we keep it that way. The same applies to jack. It is a highly specialized tool and should remain so. OK, time to disappear from this discussion. Cheers, J. --- On Wed, 6/24/09, Ralf Mardorf <ralf.mardorf(a)alice-dsl.net> wrote: > From: Ralf Mardorf <ralf.mardorf(a)alice-dsl.net> > Subject: Re: [LAD] palm pre [was Re: [ANNOUNCE] Safe real-time on thedesktop by default; Desktop/audio RT developers, read this!] > To: "james morris" <james(a)jwm-art.net> > Cc: linux-audio-dev(a)lists.linuxaudio.org > Date: Wednesday, June 24, 2009, 6:45 AM > james morris wrote: > > On 24/6/2009, "Patrick Shirkey" <pshirkey(a)boosthardware.com> > wrote: > > > > > >> It would be helpful if things that could make a > big impact will > >> continued to be discussed within the LAD > community. However this is a > >> difficult situation. No matter if the discussions > are starting prior to > >> implementation or post implementation the general > direction of the > >> arguments tend to be quite emotional. > >> > >> Is it just because audio guys have a bit more > artistic temperament than > >> most other developers? > >> > > > > I don't think this adds much to what has been stated > by Fons and others, > > but perhaps it explains a little? > > > > I'm not a hardcore audio developer like most of the > guys here, but I've > > been making audio/music/noise, and coding, since the > days of 486sx25s > > and windows 3.1. Back then, and for many years after, > it was a real > > concern to be able to disable as many irrelevant (to > audio) processes in > > the system as possible (as I'm sure you're aware). > > > > Now I have a pretty capable system, but when I want to > run RT audio apps > > I still want to disable as many irrelevant processes > on the system as I > > can. > > > > For this reason I really dislike the big monolithic > desktop environments. > > There are several applications tied into them (some > serious, plain > > useful, or just fun) which I'd love to have working > but which force me > > to install all sorts of software I really don't want > or need - along > > with all sorts of processes running in the > background. > > > > So it feels a bit freedom eroding. The choice seems to > be between a > > system which 'just works' but which wastes system > resources on things > > I don't want, or a system which I have to spend hours > setting up, > > constantly have to deal with the idiosyncrasies of, > but which is as fast > > and powerful as it could be. > > > > The notions of old, to raise the potential for system > resources to be > > only used for the job at hand (ie audio) are still > strongly rooted and > > people don't like it when they feel their freedom to > use systems in > > this way is threatened by forcing them to install > software and have > > running processes they don't want. > > > > James. > > I guess (if needed) separating rt and bread-and-butter > Linux by having a > dual-boot is an acceptable solution. A user with nearly no > knowledge > could install a comfortable distro for the everyday desktop > environment > and another for real-time usage. Even if somebody don't > have any trouble > with his Linux install, he might wish to have a safe Linux > for > productions and another Linux to have fun and fun sometimes > means to > risk things, you won't risk for a installation that needs > to be stable > all the time, that's why a dual-boot has also an advantage, > if there > will be a joint venture for distro/ desktop developers and > rt > hardliners. I have a bad mobo and for rt e.g. I need to set > irq priority > for especially the one port where the MIDI is connected to. > I don't > think things like that should be done by the desktop > environment. This > seems to be impossible. > _______________________________________________ > Linux-audio-dev mailing list > Linux-audio-dev(a)lists.linuxaudio.org > http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-dev >

16 years, 4 months

Plugin group Boolean-oriented from lv2 rdf spec?

by Ulrich Lorenz Schlüter

Hello everybody, is the lv2 plugin group Boolean-oriented from lv2 rdf spec? I find it as ingen menu item but not in the lv2 rdf spec. Does someone maybe know how I get into there. Regards and thank you Uli

16 years, 4 months

[RFC] LADSPA 1.2

by Jörn Nettingsmeier

hi everybody! as discussed in another thread, i would like to propose a new LADSPA release 1.2, which should include the following changes: 1. addition of a port range hint flag LADSPA_HINT_PERIODIC to denote periodic behaviour of a control port to be added to the LADSPA_PortRangeHintDescriptor bit field. if present, both LADSPA_HINT_BOUNDED_BELOW and LADSPA_HINT_BOUNDED_ABOVE must be specified as well. moreover, both LowerBound and UpperBound must be present in the corresponding LADSPA_PortRangeHint struct. the presence of LADSPA_HINT_PERIODIC implies that LowerBound is equivalent to UpperBound. hosts should consider displaying a widget that reflects the periodic nature of the corresponding control value, such as a rotary control. hosts that interpolate between control values defined by the user (such as automation points in a DAW) should take into account that the shortest path between two given values might cross the boundary defined by LowerBound resp. UpperBound and behave accordingly. usage example: soundfield rotators, circular panners 2. addition of a port range hint flag LADSPA_HINT_ENUMERATED to inform hosts that an integer-type port (as denoted by LADSPA_HINT_INTEGER) should be annotated with a set of labels rather than numbers. LADSPA_HINT_ENUMERATED mandates the following: LADSPA_HINT_INTEGER is set. LADSPA_HINT_BOUNDED_BELOW and LADSPA_HINT_BOUNDED_ABOVE must be set. in LADSPA_PortRangeHint, LowerBound must be 0, UpperBound must be >0. the number of labels provided must be equal to (UpperBound - 1). some of these mandatory settings are redundant and could be handled as being implicit. however, for the sake of backwards compatibility and to to allow older hosts to display a meaningful UI even if they don't implement the new flag yet, all these items MUST be set. as to the location of the actual enum of labels: fons adriaensen suggests adding them to the end of the PortNames array. this implies that for multiple enum-labelled controls, the labels would have to be concatenated and the host would have to tell them apart by keeping track of the corresponding UpperBound offsets, which might become a little messy. your comments are welcome. best, jörn

16 years, 4 months

Re: [LAD] [ANNOUNCE] Safe real-time on the desktop by default; Desktop/audio RT developers, read this!

by Jonathan Woithe

Lennart Poettering wrote: > What I am saying is that the current system is too "binary": Either > you have RT sched and then for *everything*. Or you haven't, and then > you haven't got it for *anything*. But isn't this more to do with the missing userspace support infrastructure that numerous people have pointed to than RTPRIO itself? RTPRIO itself does not imply this "all or nothing" restriction since it *can* be set on a per-application basis (given appropriate support in userspace for doing so). I also had a problem with the way PAM did the "all or nothing" approach and so I wrote set_rlimits - which grants user-specified RT privileges via RTPRIO on a user/group/program-specific basis. It's not perfect (one has to start applications via set_rlimits - eg: "set_rlimits ardour") but it works for me and didn't take all that long to write. Given this I'm sure others could come up with a workable RTPRIO-based system which included a nice user-friendly GUI configuration applet (and so forth) - set_rlimits is a proof-of-concept in a way which shows that something like this can be done. I mention this because from where I stand on the periphery it seems to me that the major issues with RTPRIO could well have been solved if the related userspace support infrastructure had been written. > For the desktop case you need something in between: RT that cannot be > misused, basically. Doing that securely is particularly hard ... Almost anything involving elevated privileges can and will be abused in time. That's why the action requires elevated privileges in the first place. Regards jonathan

16 years, 4 months

Jump to page:

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

Linux-audio-dev