Thanks to my neighbor a few hours north, Brent for the confirmation. Was not aware of any "quota" on questions and did not mean to monopolize anything, just trying to learn some things here. Apologies if error was made. Thanks to Brent's assist, am now aware that those are IRQ statements, but still uncertain where to plug those in. Guess will keep googling in search of answers. Paul --- On *Tue, 8/4/09, Brent Busby /<brent(a)keycorner.org>/* wrote: From: Brent Busby <brent(a)keycorner.org> Subject: Re: [LAU] resubmitting questions from last week To: "Linux Audio User" <linux-audio-user(a)lists.linuxaudio.org>rg>, "Paul Neaveill" <boycotthell2005(a)yahoo.com> Date: Tuesday, August 4, 2009, 1:35 PM On Mon, 3 Aug 2009, Paul Neaveill wrote: googling and all of that, am still working on getting my own kernel(s) [2 machines] going with the following as had been suggested last week: kernel hack, still looking for the rest please.? where/how to put those. I never did get an answer to some of those questions either, so I figured maybe I'd been asking too many. (I have been posting a lot of them lately.) I think the ones you've got at the top for kernel options should be safe. I'm going to try -- at least initially -- not adjusting any IRQ priorities though. It might work, considering I've got a fast machine, and from what I hear, there are even people getting away with ordinary non-RT kernels these days. Preempt RCU was supposed to be buggy for awhile, but tested now for two years... (Source: LKML) Somebody said NO_HZ was actually a good thing on a laptop being used for pro-audio, and I suppose if you can do well on a laptop you can do well anywhere... (Source: Some guy with a laptop.) And HZ_1000 is recommended almost everywhere. I don't know what the meaning of NO_HZ and HZ_1000 is together, but I guess it'd mean a jiffy rate of 1000Hz, but only when interrupts are needed? I'm just putting stuff together from lots of googling too...