17 Aug
2009
17 Aug
'09
4:05 a.m.
Now, how did *that* happen?
PID CLS RTPRIO NI PRI %CPU STAT COMMAND
3 FF 99 - 139 0.0 S< migration/0
4 FF 99 - 139 0.0 S< posixcputmr/0
14 FF 99 - 139 0.0 S< watchdog/0
17559 FF 98 - 138 0.0 SLl linuxsampler
1585 FF 85 - 125 0.0 S< IRQ-219
17562 FF 81 - 121 0.0 S midisplit
17473 FF 80 - 120 0.0 SLsl jackd
17473 FF 70 - 110 3.1 SLsl jackd
17584 FF 66 - 106 0.0 SLl jack-rack
17490 FF 65 - 105 0.9 SLl lashd
17501 FF 65 - 105 2.5 SLl fluidsynth
17502 FF 65 - 105 5.7 SLl fluidsynth
17503 FF 65 - 105 2.4 SLl fluidsynth
17559 FF 65 - 105 4.4 SLl linuxsampler
17584 FF 65 - 105 7.7 SLl jack-rack
5 FF 50 - 90 0.0 S< sirq-high/0
6 FF 50 - 90 0.0 S< sirq-timer/0
7 FF 50 - 90 0.0 S< sirq-net-tx/0
8 FF 50 - 90 0.0 S< sirq-net-rx/0
9 FF 50 - 90 0.0 S< sirq-block/0
10 FF 50 - 90 0.0 S< sirq-tasklet/0
11 FF 50 - 90 0.0 S< sirq-sched/0
12 FF 50 - 90 0.0 S< sirq-hrtimer/0
13 FF 50 - 90 0.0 S< sirq-rcu/0
53 FF 50 - 90 0.0 S< IRQ-9
316 FF 50 - 90 0.0 S< IRQ-12
LinuxSampler grabs priority 98??!
Most JACK apps start up at 65, as you can see, below the priority of jackd.
IRQ-219 is my audio interface.
How was LinuxSampler able to grab such a ridiculously high priority? Who told it to do
that?
-ken
17 Aug
17 Aug
4:23 a.m.
On Monday 17 August 2009 10:04:50 Ken Restivo wrote:
LinuxSampler grabs priority 98??!
Most JACK apps start up at 65, as you can see, below the priority of
jackd.
IRQ-219 is my audio interface.
How was LinuxSampler able to grab such a ridiculously high priority? Who
told it to do that?
Probably the same way as with jackd (two priorities of 80 and 70 in your
dump): One thread is the watchdog to kill the others if they misbehave. Of
course this thread should have its priority as high as possible...
Have fun,
Arnold
4:34 a.m.
Does your system use PAM limits.conf? Most of the online documentation
suggests a value of 95 for the rtprio setting for the audio group. Having
this thread get 98 is odd, it implies you have some other setting or are using
some other method. Either way, the process would have had to request this
value itself - nobody could really have done it for him.
The values of 65 probably come from the Jack API however that comes from
linking with the process, it is not something jackd does.
Your ps output does not include the associated uid however if LinuxSampler
were running as root it could quite easily give itself rtprio 98.
regards,
"we have to make sure the old choice [Windows] doesn't disappear”.
Jim Wong, president of IT products, Acer
From: arnold(a)arnoldarts.de
To: linux-audio-user(a)lists.linuxaudio.org
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2009 10:22:59 +0200
Subject: Re: [LAU] LinuxSampler higher priority than the audio card or jack?!
On Monday 17 August 2009 10:04:50 Ken Restivo wrote:
_________________________________________________________________
With Windows Live, you can organize, edit, and share your photos.
http://www.microsoft.com/middleeast/windows/windowslive/products/photo-gall…
LinuxSampler grabs priority 98??!
Most JACK apps start up at 65, as you can see, below the priority of
jackd.
IRQ-219 is my audio interface.
How was LinuxSampler able to grab such a ridiculously high priority? Who
told it to do that?
Probably the same way as with jackd (two priorities of 80 and 70 in your
dump): One thread is the watchdog to kill the others if they misbehave. Of
course this thread should have its priority as high as possible...
Have fun,
Arnold
1:14 p.m.
New subject: LinuxSampler higher priority than the audio card or jack?!
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 10:34:41AM +0200, Nick Copeland wrote:
Does your system use PAM limits.conf? Most of the online documentation
suggests a value of 95 for the rtprio setting for the audio group. Having
this thread get 98 is odd, it implies you have some other setting or are using
some other method. Either way, the process would have had to request this
value itself - nobody could really have done it for him.
The values of 65 probably come from the Jack API however that comes from
linking with the process, it is not something jackd does.
Your ps output does not include the associated uid however if LinuxSampler
were running as root it could quite easily give itself rtprio 98.
Yes I have limits.conf. I have it set up in the standard jack way.
I vaguely recall a way to set separate limits for different applications, but I've
since forgotten where I found that. If so, perhaps I can put a limit on linuxsampler so it
doesn't grab a higher priority than the audio card, or jackd itself!
Thanks
-ken
----------
> From: arnold(a)arnoldarts.de
> To: linux-audio-user(a)lists.linuxaudio.org
> Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2009 10:22:59 +0200
> Subject: Re: [LAU] LinuxSampler higher priority than the audio card or jack?!
>
> On Monday 17 August 2009 10:04:50 Ken Restivo wrote:
> > LinuxSampler grabs priority 98??!
> > Most JACK apps start up at 65, as you can see, below the priority of
> > jackd.
> > IRQ-219 is my audio interface.
> > How was LinuxSampler able to grab such a ridiculously high priority? Who
> > told it to do that?
>
> Probably the same way as with jackd (two priorities of 80 and 70 in your
> dump): One thread is the watchdog to kill the others if they misbehave. Of
> course this thread should have its priority as high as possible...
>
5684
days inactive
5684
days old
linux-audio-user@lists.linuxaudio.org
3 comments
3 participants
participants (3)
-
Arnold Krille -
Ken Restivo -
Nick Copeland