lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2004]   [Nov]   [26]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    SubjectRe: [Jackit-devel] Re: [Fwd: Re: [patch] Real-Time Preemption, -RT-2.6.9-mm1-V0.4]
    From
    Date
    Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> writes:

    > if it's possible to 'silently' overrun the next due interrupt (somewhat,
    > but not large enough overrun to cause a hard ALSA xrun) then the
    > processing delay will i believe be accounted as a 'wakeup delay'. In
    > that case to make the delayed_usecs value truly accurate, i'd at least
    > add this:
    >
    > poll_enter = jack_get_microseconds ();
    >
    > if (poll_enter > driver->poll_next) {
    > /*
    > * This processing cycle got delayed over
    > * the next due interrupt! Do not account this
    > * as a wakeup delay:
    > */
    > driver->poll_next = 0;
    > }
    >
    > but i'd also suggest to put in a counter into that branch so that this
    > condition doesnt get lost.

    Added the test Ingo suggests plus a new counter (poll_late) to CVS,
    JACK version 0.99.13.
    --
    joq
    -
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
    More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
    Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 14:08    [W:4.647 / U:1.120 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site