11 May
2012
11 May
'12
1:16 a.m.
Hi
This has been bothering me for a while, and trying to catch up on the
rtirq thread, I thought I'd ask here:
I'm running arch, and I used to be quite happy with the performance with
the stock arch kernel. But something happened around 3.1 (or so). Now I
get xruns every once in a while, even with conservative buffer settings.
It used to work just fine with both alsa and through jack, and now the
problem is both places, which leads me to believe that's it's got
nothing to do with my jack settings (but I might be wrong).
Before I cat my whole box here, maybe someone had a similar experience
and knows a solution. Or could extract the conclusion from the rtirq
thread, the information in there seems overwhelming.
--
Atte
http://atte.dk http://modlys.dk
11 May
11 May
6:21 a.m.
OT: I dropped Arch for music. I still like Arch, but IMO the rolling
release model makes an audio workstation unstable/unusable. I can't
remember when I run pacman the last time to upgrade my install. I go
with Debian and Ubuntu. IMO Ubuntu is the better choice for a DAW. YMMV.
- Ralf
8:38 a.m.
On 2012-05-11 06:20, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
OT: I dropped Arch for music. I still like Arch, but
IMO the rolling
release model makes an audio workstation unstable/unusable. I can't
remember when I run pacman the last time to upgrade my install. I go
with Debian and Ubuntu. IMO Ubuntu is the better choice for a DAW. YMMV.
Been there, done that.
I ran debian for years, but god tired of the ancient software available
in stable. I could run testing or unstable, but that introduces the same
problems you mention. In my experience the minor breaks that can happen
in an arch upgrade are 1) small and 2) easy to fix, especially thinks to
the high quality of the arch documentation/community. You could argue
(and are probably hinting at) that I was bit by exactly that: the
rolling upgrade.
I switched to ubuntu for the 1/2 year release cycle, and was happy with
it for a few years. The best thing ubuntu has going for it IMO is the
mainstream-ness, meaning that more people use it and (esp if you stick
to the default software) bugs are less rare. However the bloat, the poor
realtime kernel support, the rumor that ubuntu was considering switching
to a rolling release model and the general direction ubuntu is heading
in made me switch to arch.
I realize that you were going OT and trying to be helpful. However I'm
sure that if I follow your advise and install ubuntu, the next time I
get a problem some other guy will tell me that he prefers arch, debian,
gentoo, suse (or windows) and that my problem would go away if I switch.
In the long run dist hopping is not really fruitful for neither the user
or the community, and I would (as I did in the past) think hard before
switching distro, and I would only consider it the last resort.
But hey, thanks for sharing the thought :-)
--
Atte
http://atte.dk http://modlys.dk
8:50 a.m.
http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=51360 says that they're at
linux-rt 3.2.16_rt27-1, so I'm OT again, if you insist in using 3.3.4,
but perhaps this is the better way to go, using the "default" kernel-rt.
Is 3.3.4 a full preempt kernel?
$ grep PREEMPT /boot/config-$(uname -r)
# CONFIG_PREEMPT_VOLUNTARY is not set
CONFIG_PREEMPT=y
$ grep FORCE /boot/config-$(uname -r)
CONFIG_IRQ_FORCED_THREADING=y
8:53 a.m.
On Fri, 2012-05-11 at 08:50 +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=51360 says
that they're at
linux-rt 3.2.16_rt27-1, so I'm OT again, if you insist in using 3.3.4,
but perhaps this is the better way to go, using the "default" kernel-rt.
Is 3.3.4 a full preempt kernel?
$ grep PREEMPT /boot/config-$(uname -r)
# CONFIG_PREEMPT_VOLUNTARY is not set
CONFIG_PREEMPT=y
$ grep FORCE /boot/config-$(uname -r)
CONFIG_IRQ_FORCED_THREADING=y
Pardon, Arch don't ships with such a config.
2:59 p.m.
On Fri, 11 May 2012 08:53:23 +0200
Ralf Mardorf <ralf.mardorf(a)alice-dsl.net> wrote:
On Fri, 2012-05-11 at 08:50 +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=51360 says that they're at
> linux-rt 3.2.16_rt27-1, so I'm OT again, if you insist in using 3.3.4,
> but perhaps this is the better way to go, using the "default" kernel-rt.
>
> Is 3.3.4 a full preempt kernel?
Jumping into this as a happy Arch user - My studio machine has been
updated within the past couple of weeks. uname reports:
3.3.2-1-ARCH #1 SMP PREEMPT Sat Apr 14 09:48:37 CEST 2012
I've taken to cloning my root partition before big updates so that if
something does affect performance I can boot the backup partition.
When I was using Planet CCRMA/Fedora, I could keep different kernels
but I had some issues doing that with Arch and lib inconsistencies
if I went too far back, so I've just been basically ping-ponging
between root partitions and hand-configuring grub. If I weren't
already adept with such things it might have seemed cumbersome but
I do know it, and it seems consistent with the Arch way.
I've been happy with the 3.3.2 release, though I haven't done a big
recording since the update from whatever's on the old kernel.
--
======================================================================
Joe Hartley - UNIX/network Consultant - jh(a)brainiac.com
Without deviation from the norm, "progress" is not possible. - FZappa
13 May
13 May
9:03 p.m.
On 2012-05-11 08:50, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=51360 says
that they're at
linux-rt 3.2.16_rt27-1, so I'm OT again, if you insist in using 3.3.4,
but perhaps this is the better way to go, using the "default" kernel-rt.
You're right!
It has its quirks, and I didn't remember getting better rt perf from it.
But I've now switched back, and will return with more info after some
time on this kernel.
--
Atte
http://atte.dk http://modlys.dk
14 May
14 May
10:19 a.m.
On Mon, May 14, 2012 at 4:01 AM, Atte André Jensen <atte(a)email.dk> wrote:
On 2012-05-11 08:50, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
By the way, there is also apparently an "LTS" RT kernel in the AUR for
those wanting something hopefully more stable:
http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=56195
michael
http://aur.archlinux.org/**packages.php?ID=51360<http://aur.archlinux.or…
that they're at
linux-rt 3.2.16_rt27-1, so I'm OT again, if you insist in using 3.3.4,
but perhaps this is the better way to go, using the "default" kernel-rt.
You're right!
It has its quirks, and I didn't remember getting better rt perf from it.
But I've now switched back, and will return with more info after some time
on this kernel.
4996
days inactive
5000
days old
linux-audio-user@lists.linuxaudio.org
7 comments
4 participants
participants (4)
-
Atte André Jensen -
Joe Hartley -
michael noble -
Ralf Mardorf