lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2005]   [Jan]   [15]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    SubjectRe: [PATCH] [request for inclusion] Realtime LSM
    From
    Date
    Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> writes:

    > * Jack O'Quin <joq@io.com> wrote:
    >
    >> OK, I reran with just 5 processes reniced from -10 to -5. On my
    >> system they were: events, khelper, kblockd, aio and reiserfs. In
    >> addition, I reniced loop0 from -20 to -5.
    >
    >> One major problem: this `nice --20' hack affects every thread, not
    >> just the critical realtime ones. That's not what we want. Audio
    >> applications make very conscious choices which threads run with high
    >> priority and which do not.
    >
    > how much did this problem affect your test? Could the source of the 500
    > msec delays be the non-highprio components of the test that somehow
    > became nice --20?

    Some interference is definitely possible. But, the test does not
    involve any graphical interface, so I'd expect that to be small.
    Looking at jack_test3_client.cpp, the main thread just does a sleep()
    while the process cycle is running.

    Still, it's hard to be sure.

    Probably, the best way to tell would be patching JACK so it uses
    nice(-20) instead of pthread_setschedparam() for the realtime threads.
    As a hack, that looks easy. I'll build a working directory with just
    that change, so we can experiment with it better.
    --
    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 14:09    [W:4.103 / U:0.228 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site