Roger Larsson wrote:
> 1) Why shouldn't the low-latency patches work for another architecture?
> Andrew Morton might be interested to fix other architectures too.
> (but most patches are not in architecture specific code)
>
> 2) Montavistas reschedulable kernel is a very interesting approach, newly
> released an update by Robert Love
> http://kpreempt.sourceforge.net/
> http://tech9.net/rml/linux/patch-rml-2.4.10-pre2-preempt-kernel-1
> (there are still some spikes, but the floor is smooth)
>
> But note you with both approaches you want to run the latency critical process
> with a higher priority, and probably with the memory locked down.
>
> See example code (latencytest) at:
> http://www.gardena.net/benno/linux/audio/
> (but there is no need to run at the maximum possible priority since your
> process will be alone anyway...)
Just a data point here -
The Andrew Morton patches have worked well for
me here - I test it often with quake 3 arena, and am
currently on 2.4.10-pre4 -
I was never successful in getting the kernel to
compile and run with any of the the other low
latency patches floating around -
cu
jjs
-
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/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Sep 07 2001 - 21:00:27 EST