Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [alsa-devel] Re: [rtl] Low-latency patches working GREAT (<2.9ms audio latency), see testresults ,but ISDN troubles | Date | Sun, 29 Aug 1999 22:24:10 -0400 | From | Paul Barton-Davis <> |
| |
Victor "Not Really A Curmudgeon" Yodaiken writes:
>What does that really mean? MacOS is pretty good for multimedia >if that is all you want to do and you have simple multimedia. >Can you drive a robotic system, sampling sensors, driving a display, >operating a feedback control loop, and pulling data from a large >scale data base using Beos? I doubt it. Beos offers low latency for >simple tasks, but DOS does that too.
absolutely. and DOS is a pretty reasonable platform for developing the kind of audio applications i am interested in these days, except that it lacks 90% of the desired environment as the price of letting me take over the machine when i need to. but yeah, DOS is great: its just an extended interrupt handling mechanism, and as such, rarely, if ever, gets in the way when its not supposed to.
>I never see any published data on BeOS benchmarks so it's hard to evaluate. >But there are some obvious problems with the OS in terms of >(A) hard rt response (none) (B) high speed networking (not) (C) high >bandwidth disk io ...
(A) mostly irrelevant for real-time audio generation/processing if soft rt response is good (B) irrelevant for RT-AG/P (C) not needed (low bandwith is adequate) for RT-AG/P
>> there is persistent denial on l-k and elsewhere that an OS designed to >> effectively support "traditional" computer usage (compilation, number >> crunching, data serving) has any fundamental differences from one >> based around, say, real-time audio generation & manipulation.
>Specifics would be useful. We need a >multimedia component of lmbench.
i don't know what kind of specifics you want, but i'd like to be able to write a program that, despite running on a multitasking, multiuser OS like Linux, can plan on basically having access to the same hardware performance characteristics as if it were running without an OS.
That is, if I have an loop that wants to do this:
generate 32 samples read 32 samples from an A/D converter do some math with the 32 read samples mix the generated and read samples together send them to a D/A converter sleep for 0.5ms
then i'd like it to work under Linux without worrying that:
(1) the 32 samples will take more than 32*1/sampling-rate secs to generate (assuming that this is theoretically possible given the nature of the computation involved and the CPU speed). (2) that reading 32 samples from the A/D converter will take longer than the actual transfer time. (3) that writing 32 samples to the D/A converter will take longer than the actual transfer time (4) that i might sleep for too long
The above numbers are reasonable, but not necessarily the ones to use.
Why do I want to use Linux (or any OS) ? Because no application that does this runs all the time; because developing this application has taken me 6-7 man-months already and that time involves a continual cycling between development and running of the current result; because i don't want to have write my own window system, file system, etc. etc.
--p
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |