Messages in this thread |  | | | Subject | Re: [Jackit-devel] Re: Real-Time Preemption, -RT-2.6.10-rc2-mm3-V0.7.31-19 | | From | "Jack O'Quin" <> | | Date | 02 Dec 2004 11:07:39 -0600 |
| |
Florian Schmidt <mista.tapas@gmx.net> writes:
> I suppose instead of catching the signal the user might just monitor the > syslog. I'm not sure there's printk's triggered by thisalready , but i'm > sure if not, ingo might add them. So a trivial patch for jackd would > probably look like this: > > --- libjack/client.c.orig 2004-12-02 17:55:04.000000000 +0100 > +++ libjack/client.c 2004-12-02 17:56:23.000000000 +0100 > @@ -1238,6 +1238,9 @@ > if (control->sync_cb) > jack_call_sync_client (client); > > + // enable atomicity check for RP kernels > + gettimeofday(1,1); > + > if (control->process) { > if (control->process (control->nframes, > control->process_arg) > @@ -1247,7 +1250,10 @@ > } else { > control->state = Finished; > } > - > + > + // disable atomicity check > + gettimeofday(0,1); > + > if (control->timebase_cb) > jack_call_timebase_master (client); >
The sync_cb and timebase_cb callbacks actually need to be RT-safe, too. ;-)
Is printk() guaranteed not to wait inside the kernel? I am not familiar with its internal implementation. -- 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/
|  |