Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 10 Aug 2004 00:02:26 -0700 | From | Thomas Zimmerman <> | Subject | Re: PATCH: cdrecord: avoiding scsi device numbering for ide devices |
| |
On 09-Aug 10:51, Albert Cahalan wrote: > On Tue, 2004-08-10 at 00:47, Con Kolivas wrote: > > Albert Cahalan writes: > > > On Mon, 2004-08-09 at 18:59, Con Kolivas wrote: > > >> Albert Cahalan writes: > > > >> > Joerg: > > >> > "WARNING: Cannot do mlockall(2).\n" > > >> > "WARNING: This causes a high risk for buffer underruns.\n" > > >> > Fixed: > > >> > "Warning: You don't have permission to lock memory.\n" > > >> > " If the computer is not idle, the CD may be ruined.\n" > > >> > > > >> > Joerg: > > >> > "WARNING: Cannot set priority class parameters priocntl(PC_SETPARMS)\n" > > >> > "WARNING: This causes a high risk for buffer underruns.\n" > > >> > Fixed: > > >> > "Warning: You don't have permission to hog the CPU.\n" > > >> > " If the computer is not idle, the CD may be ruined.\n" > > >> > > >> Huh? That can't be right. Every cd burner this side of the 21st century has > > >> buffer underrun protection. > > > > > > I'm pretty sure my FireWire CD-RW/CD-R is from > > > another century. Not that it's unusual in 2004. > > > > > >> I've burnt cds _while_ capturing and encoding > > >> video using truckloads of cpu and I/O without superuser privileges, had all > > >> the cdrecord warnings and didn't have a buffer underrun. > > > > > > That's cool. My hardware won't come close to that. > > > Burning a coaster costs money. > > > > > > Let me put it this way: $$ $ $$$ $$ $ $$$ $$ $ > > > > > > The warning, if re-worded, will save people from > > > frustration and wasted money. > > > > Sounds good; how about something less terrifying? That warning sounds like a > > ruined cd is likely. > > I'm not about to burn CDs trying, but I do believe > that "a ruined cd is likely" would be accurate if I > were to keep busy with Mozilla and such. OpenOffice > would surely ruin a cd. Light web browsing makes my > mp3 player skip. > > Not all of us have hardware like you do. Encoding > video is something I wouldn't bother to try, even > without the CD burner going! > > (the box isn't that old; it's fanless though) >
I've only created coaster _with_ the suid bit while ab^H^Husing the computer to do other things--like compiling a new kernel. 2.6 is much better at setting up DMA access to the drive; 2.4 would use huge amounts of system time (> 90%). When that happened, the system felt like it was out to lunch--mouse cursor updates would sometimes take >2 seconds. Cdrecord used more cpu if it was suid. I haven't had a problem in 2.6. The warning is counter to my expericnce with cdrecord. I think the warning would be worded better as:
"Warning: Cdrecord was unable to get exclusive access to the cpu." "Warning: This may cause Buffer underruns from other activity."
and
"Warning: Cdrecord was unable to get exclusive access to memory." "Warning: This may cause Buffer underruns from other activity."
But drop the first one if you're on >2.6.
Thomas - 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/
| |