20 Jun
2005
20 Jun
'05
7:12 a.m.
Quoting Christoph Eckert <mchristoph.eckert(a)t-online.de>de>:
We all would be glad if we didn't need to patch
and recompile
the kernel. BUt there's hope that we get realtime
capabilities in the vanilla kernel soon. Let's stay tuned.
You are a bit late actually. :)
From 2.6.12 changelog:
"commit e43379f10b42194b8a6e1de342cfb44463c0f6da
Author: Matt Mackall <mpm(a)selenic.com>
Date: Sun May 1 08:59:00 2005 -0700
[PATCH] nice and rt-prio rlimits
Add a pair of rlimits for allowing non-root tasks to raise nice and rt
priorities. Defaults to traditional behavior. Originally written by
Chris Wright.
The patch implements a simple rlimit ceiling for the RT (and nice)
priorities
a task can set. The rlimit defaults to 0, meaning no change in behavior by
default. A value of 50 means RT priority levels 1-50 are allowed. A
value of
100 means all 99 privilege levels from 1 to 99 are allowed. CAP_SYS_NICE is
blanket permission.
(akpm: see
http://www.uwsg.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/0503.1/1921.html for
tips on integrating this with PAM).
Signed-off-by: Matt Mackall <mpm(a)selenic.com>
Acked-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo(a)elte.hu>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm(a)osdl.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds(a)osdl.org>"
Sampo Savolainen
20 Jun
20 Jun
6:38 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-user] Re: What parts of Linux audio simply suck ?
On Mon, 2005-06-20 at 02:12, Sampo Savolainen wrote:
Quoting Christoph Eckert
<mchristoph.eckert(a)t-online.de>de>:
He may have been talking about the realtime preemption patch by Ingo
Molnar...
-- Fernando
We all would be glad if we didn't need to
patch and recompile
the kernel. BUt there's hope that we get realtime
capabilities in the vanilla kernel soon. Let's stay tuned.
You are a bit late actually. :)
From 2.6.12 changelog:
"commit e43379f10b42194b8a6e1de342cfb44463c0f6da
Author: Matt Mackall <mpm(a)selenic.com>
Date: Sun May 1 08:59:00 2005 -0700
[PATCH] nice and rt-prio rlimits
Add a pair of rlimits for allowing non-root tasks to raise nice and rt
priorities. Defaults to traditional behavior. Originally written by
Chris Wright. 
8:16 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-user] Re: What parts of Linux audio simply suck ?
He may have been talking about the realtime
preemption
patch by Ingo Molnar...
to be honest, I'm not that experienced kernel patcher. I'm
currently running a 2.6.10 with the RT-LSM-patch and I'm
happy that I managed to install a kernel of my own.
Fernando, you have had a nice summary about kernels at LAC
2005. Are the slides available somewhere? The last time I
visited the LAC page it wasn't available. I'd be glad to have
the document because I remember there has been a nice
overview.
Best regards
ce
11:10 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-user] Re: What parts of Linux audio simply suck ?
On Mon, 2005-06-20 at 15:16, Christoph Eckert wrote:
I should make it available, except that it is now obsolete (again)
:-)
-- Fernando
He may have
been talking about the realtime preemption
patch by Ingo Molnar...
to be honest, I'm not that experienced kernel patcher. I'm
currently running a 2.6.10 with the RT-LSM-patch and I'm
happy that I managed to install a kernel of my own.
Fernando, you have had a nice summary about kernels at LAC
2005. Are the slides available somewhere? The last time I
visited the LAC page it wasn't available. I'd be glad to have
the document because I remember there has been a nice
overview.
11:37 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-user] Re: What parts of Linux audio simply suck ?
On Tue, 2005-06-21 at 01:46, Christoph Eckert wrote:
I'll see if I can find the time to change whatever is obsolete...
-- Fernando
I should make
it available, except that it is now obsolete
(again)
:-)
*sigh* ;-) .
But anyway there was a nice overview. 
28 Jun
28 Jun
2:39 a.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-user] Re: What parts of Linux audio simply suck ?
On Tue, 21 Jun 2005 at 18:37 -0700, Fernando Lopez-Lezcano wrote:
On Tue, 2005-06-21 at 01:46, Christoph Eckert wrote:
I'll see if I can find the time to change whatever is obsolete...
-- Fernando
It seems to me, every time I go to build a kernel and try to dig this
info up, that the knowledge is somewhat spread out and not easily found.
Wikis are good at collecting this sort of knowledge, I think. If you
need a wiki dust particle to form this raindrop on, try this one:
http://fugal.net:2500/linuxaudio/new/Kernels
That goes for everyone, of course.
--
.O. Hans Fugal | De gustibus non disputandum est.
..O http://hans.fugal.net | Debian, vim, mutt, ruby, text, gpg
OOO | WindowMaker, gaim, UTF-8, RISC, JS Bach
---------------------------------------------------------------------
GnuPG Fingerprint: 6940 87C5 6610 567F 1E95 CB5E FC98 E8CD E0AA D460
I should
make it available, except that it is now obsolete
(again)
:-)
*sigh* ;-) .
But anyway there was a nice overview.
4 Jul
4 Jul
3:43 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-user] Kernel building (was: What parts of Linux audio simply suck?)
It seems to me, every time I go to build a kernel and
try
to dig this info up, that the knowledge is somewhat spread
out and not easily found. Wikis are good at collecting this
sort of knowledge, I think. If you need a wiki dust
particle to form this raindrop on, try this one:
http://fugal.net:2500/linuxaudio/new/Kernels
That goes for everyone, of course.
The problem is what you wrote above: Such knowledge currently
expires faster than you can type a tutorial.
I just have read some things about how to build a kernel, and
as soon you have learned a bit you'll find the next page
which states that there meanwhile is another solution ;-) .
So, perhaps we should wait a bit until things have settled a
bit...
But what do users in the time remaining? We should use the
most recent kernels to see how well it works or even not :( .
Best regards
ce
20 Jun
20 Jun
7:48 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-user] Re: What parts of Linux audio simply suck ?
El lun, 20-06-2005 a las 06:12, Sampo Savolainen escribió:
Quoting Christoph Eckert
<mchristoph.eckert(a)t-online.de>de>:
Does this means that I can download the kernel source, compile it
without _any_ patch and have a "multimedia kernel" (aka a suitable
kernel for doing realtime audio) in my machine?
If so, damn, I'm downloading it!
Cheers, Damian.-
Those are my principles. If you don't like them I have others. --
Groucho Marx
We all would be glad if we didn't need to
patch and recompile
the kernel. BUt there's hope that we get realtime
capabilities in the vanilla kernel soon. Let's stay tuned.
You are a bit late actually. :)
From 2.6.12 changelog:
"commit e43379f10b42194b8a6e1de342cfb44463c0f6da
Author: Matt Mackall <mpm(a)selenic.com>
Date: Sun May 1 08:59:00 2005 -0700
[PATCH] nice and rt-prio rlimits
Add a pair of rlimits for allowing non-root tasks to raise nice and rt
priorities. Defaults to traditional behavior. Originally written by
Chris Wright.
The patch implements a simple rlimit ceiling for the RT (and nice)
priorities
a task can set. The rlimit defaults to 0, meaning no change in behavior by
default. A value of 50 means RT priority levels 1-50 are allowed. A
value of
100 means all 99 privilege levels from 1 to 99 are allowed. CAP_SYS_NICE is
blanket permission.
(akpm: see
http://www.uwsg.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/0503.1/1921.html for
tips on integrating this with PAM).
Signed-off-by: Matt Mackall <mpm(a)selenic.com>
Acked-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo(a)elte.hu>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm(a)osdl.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds(a)osdl.org>"
Sampo Savolainen
8:24 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-user] Re: What parts of Linux audio simply suck ?
Does this means that I can download the kernel
source,
compile it without _any_ patch and have a "multimedia
kernel" (aka a suitable kernel for doing realtime audio) in
my machine?
If so, damn, I'm downloading it!
I'd also be interested in this issue. I already built a 2.6.12
but had bad luck about latency. Is it well prepared (vanilla
not MM), which options need to be set and how do I then deal
with the realtime stuff, e.g. module loading, writing
to /proc/ etc.
Best regards
ce
8:50 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-user] Re: What parts of Linux audio simply suck ?
Does this means that I can download the kernel source,
compile it
without _any_ patch and have a "multimedia kernel" (aka a suitable
kernel for doing realtime audio) in my machine?
It certainly seems so. Unfortunately you still have to patch PAM.
If so, damn, I'm downloading it!
Cheers, Damian.-
Those are my principles. If you don't like them I have others. --
Groucho Marx
11:16 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-user] Re: What parts of Linux audio simply suck ?
On Mon, 2005-06-20 at 14:48, Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer wrote:
El lun, 20-06-2005 a las 06:12, Sampo Savolainen
escribió:
Hmmm, not really. This patch gives _access_ to realtime scheduling to
non-root users, provided that PAM in your distribution (Pluggable
Authentication Modules) is patched to recognize the extra options, or
you have a small program that would allow you to use this if PAM is not
use by your distro.
This (access to realtime scheduling) is of course vital, you don't need
to do things as root. It serves the same purpose as and "officially"
replaces the realtime lsm kernel module.
This patch by itself does not provide for good low latency behavior.
2.6.12 should be pretty decent in that respect but to really get good
latencies you would have to add the realtime preempt patch by Ingo
Molnar[1]
-- Fernando
[1] http://people.redhat.com/~mingo/realtime-preempt/
Quoting Christoph Eckert
<mchristoph.eckert(a)t-online.de>de>:
Does this means that I can download the kernel source, compile it
without _any_ patch and have a "multimedia kernel" (aka a suitable
kernel for doing realtime audio) in my machine?
If so, damn, I'm downloading it! We all would be glad if we didn't need to
patch and recompile
the kernel. BUt there's hope that we get realtime
capabilities in the vanilla kernel soon. Let's stay tuned.
You are a bit late actually. :)
From 2.6.12 changelog:
"commit e43379f10b42194b8a6e1de342cfb44463c0f6da
Author: Matt Mackall <mpm(a)selenic.com>
Date: Sun May 1 08:59:00 2005 -0700
[PATCH] nice and rt-prio rlimits
Add a pair of rlimits for allowing non-root tasks to raise nice and rt
priorities. Defaults to traditional behavior. Originally written by
Chris Wright.
The patch implements a simple rlimit ceiling for the RT (and nice)
priorities
a task can set. The rlimit defaults to 0, meaning no change in behavior by
default. A value of 50 means RT priority levels 1-50 are allowed. A
value of
100 means all 99 privilege levels from 1 to 99 are allowed. CAP_SYS_NICE is
blanket permission.
(akpm: see
http://www.uwsg.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/0503.1/1921.html for
tips on integrating this with PAM).
Signed-off-by: Matt Mackall <mpm(a)selenic.com>
Acked-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo(a)elte.hu>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm(a)osdl.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds(a)osdl.org>"
Sampo Savolainen
7083
days inactive
7097
days old
linux-audio-user@lists.linuxaudio.org
11 comments
6 participants
participants (6)
-
Christoph Eckert -
Fernando Lopez-Lezcano -
Hans Fugal -
Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer -
Noah Roberts -
Sampo Savolainen