22 Dec
2003
22 Dec
'03
4 p.m.
Florian Schmidt <mista.tapas(a)gmx.net> wrote:
Hi Andrew,
i'm a user of a 2.4.22 kernel patched with the preemption patches plus
your Low Latency patches. It works very nicely for audio applications
[like jackd, ardour, etc...].
Cool.
Looking into the config menu of the 2.6.0 kernel i
only find a
"preemptible kernel" config option. Your low latency patches seem not to
be included. Do you have plans of including your patches in the 2.6.x
kernel? I heard rumors about merging the preemptible and your LL patches
since they seem to go very nicely together.. Any truth to that?
The objective in 2.6 is that the preemptible kernel achieve similar
worst-case latencies to the low-latency-patched kernel. So 2.6 should meet
your requirements out of the box.
That being said, last time I instrumented the 2.6 kernel it was not
achieving the targets. The specific failure was occurring when the machine
had a very large number of inodes in cache and the VM system was reclaiming
those inodes.
It is unlikely that you will strike this problem in real-world usage, so
2.6 should work fine for you. As ever, testing results would be
appreciated.
(The inode reclaim problem is fairly complex, but I just happen to see a
patch from Dipankar Sarma in my inbox this morning which is designed to fix
it up).