3 Oct
2007
3 Oct
'07
3:10 p.m.
Okay, thanks for explaining the difference :-) ! Ill stick with the
vanilla-kernel then.
Matthias
On Wednesday 03 October 2007 18:39:53 Frank Barknecht wrote:
Hallo,
Matthias Schönborn hat gesagt: // Matthias Schönborn wrote:
I've just read that there's a difference
between a realtime-kernel and
the low-latency-kernel provided by ubuntustudio. The text in the german
wiki on ubuntuusers.de said, that a realtime-kernel is slightly better
than the lowlatencykernel (http://wiki.ubuntuusers.de/Echtzeitkernel) -
then why isn't it used in ubuntustudio? Or do I just mix something up?
I think, this wiki and maybe Ubuntustudio as well are using a very
confusing terminology.
Generally we have two kinds of kernels: The "vanilla" kernel as
downloadable on kernel.org and the same kernel, but patched with Ingo
Molnars RT-patches. The vanilla kernel, if configured properly with
CONFIG_PREEMPT etc., already gives very good performance in the low
latency department, enough for many users, even audio users. I run one
of these.
If you want more, then you can install a RT-patched kernel, as is
provided in the linux-rt or linux-realtime packages. I would call the
Ingo-Molnar-patched kernels Realtime-Kernels or Low-Latency-Kernels.
I would not call the vanilla kernel a "low latency" kernel. It's just
a vanilla kernel configured with CONFIG_PREEMPT, which happens to have
good low latency performance as well. But that alone shouldn't be
taken to give it a different name. It has good network performance,
too, but I still wouldn't call it a "network kernel" and it supports
USB keyboards, but still it's not a "USB keyboard kernel". That's a
bit silly. ;)
Ciao