Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [patch] Real-Time Preemption, -RT-2.6.10-rc3-mm1-V0.7.33-0 | From | Lee Revell <> | Date | Tue, 14 Dec 2004 17:47:11 -0500 |
| |
On Tue, 2004-12-14 at 23:31 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote: > * Lee Revell <rlrevell@joe-job.com> wrote: > > > On Tue, 2004-12-14 at 22:18 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > the two projects are obviously complementary and i have no intention to > > > reinvent the wheel in any way. Best would be to bring hires timers up to > > > upstream-mergable state (independently of the -RT patch) and ask Andrew > > > to include it in -mm, then i'd port -RT to it automatically. > > > > Among other things I think Paul Davis mentioned that George's high res > > timer patch would make it possible for JACK to send MIDI clock. This > > would be a huge improvement. > > <clueless question> roughly what latency/accuracy requirements does the > MIDI clock have, and why is it an advantage if Linux generates it? What > generates it otherwise - external MIDI hardware? Or was the problem > mainly not latency/accuracy but that Linux couldnt generate a > finegrained enough clock?
Being able to send or receive MIDI clock is a common feature for hardware and software samplers, sequencers, etc. It just allows more flexibility in your setup. I think currently Linux can receive MIDI clock better than it can send.
To answer the last question I think the clock was not fine grained enough. But as far as timing requirements I don't actually know the details. Paul?
Lee
- 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/
| |