From: Robert Love <rml@tech9.net>
To: Andre Pang <ozone@algorithm.com.au>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, safemode@speakeasy.net,
Dieter.Nuetzel@hamburg.de, iafilius@xs4all.nl,
ilsensine@inwind.it, george@mvista.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Preemption Latency Measurement Tool
Date: 23 Sep 2001 14:31:17 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1001269889.1325.3.camel@phantasy> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1001246632.952193.13493.nullmailer@bozar.algorithm.com.au>
In-Reply-To: <1000939458.3853.17.camel@phantasy> <1001131036.557760.4340.nullmailer@bozar.algorithm.com.au> <1001139027.1245.28.camel@phantasy> <1001143341.117502.5311.nullmailer@bozar.algorithm.com.au> <1001228764.864.53.camel@phantasy> <1001246632.952193.13493.nullmailer@bozar.algorithm.com.au>
On Sun, 2001-09-23 at 08:03, Andre Pang wrote:
> I found out why, it's the driver. I'm an idiot for not trying
> this before ... I was previously using ALSA's snd-card-ymfpci
> driver; I switchted to the OSS ymfpci driver that comes with the
> kernel. My latencies used to be 15ms on average, with spikes >
> 30ms; they're now ~3ms with some occasional spikes up to 10ms.
You are the second or third person to report high latencies with ALSA
drivers. I wonder what braindead locking they do?
Good find.
> The graphs and numbers are up at
> http://www.algorithm.com.au/hacking/linux-lowlatency/
Nice results.
> > maybe the problem is in the "overruns" -- I don't know what that means
> > exactly. maybe someone else on the list can shed some light?
> > otheriwse, you can email the author perhaps.
>
> An over-run occurs when the latencytest program, which plays a
> continuous sound, doesn't get re-scheduled quickly enough. This
> results in a sound dropout because it can't re-fill its buffer.
> This is similar to what you would get in XMMS, except that
> latencytest simulates professional audio applications which must
> run with _very_ small buffers in order to get low latencies.
> (Imagine your computer being sync'ed in realtime with lots of
> other music equipment and have it drag behind by 30ms -- it
> doesn't sound good :).
Oh, ok -- its pretty much the number of times the scheduling latency was
greater than the audio buffer time.
> But I guess my problem's solved ... thanks so much to Andrew,
> yourself, MontaVista, Dietel and all the other guys who spend
> their hours benchmarking so this can be improved! If you still
> want me to run benchmarks, let me know. The 15 kernels I've
> compiled since starting testing have gotta be useful for
> something.
You are welcome :)
I should probably take a look at ALSA stuff and see if I can find what
exactly is the culprit.
Thank you for the feedback, now we know.
--
Robert M. Love
rml at ufl.edu
rml at tech9.net
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2001-09-23 18:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 72+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2001-09-19 22:44 [PATCH] Preemption Latency Measurement Tool Robert Love
2001-09-20 1:40 ` Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams
2001-09-20 2:23 ` safemode
2001-09-20 1:13 ` David Lang
2001-09-20 2:57 ` Robert Love
2001-09-20 2:38 ` Robert Love
2001-09-20 6:31 ` Dieter Nützel
2001-09-20 20:27 ` Robert Love
[not found] ` <200109202111.f8KLBgG16833@zero.tech9.net>
2001-09-20 22:09 ` [PATCH] Preemption patch 2.4.9-ac12 Robert Love
2001-09-20 6:31 ` [PATCH] Preemption Latency Measurement Tool Dieter Nützel
[not found] ` <20010920063143.424BD1E41A@Cantor.suse.de>
2001-09-20 6:41 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2001-09-20 7:57 ` Dieter Nützel
[not found] ` <20010920075751.6CA791E6B2@Cantor.suse.de>
2001-09-20 8:21 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2001-09-20 20:13 ` george anzinger
2001-09-20 20:38 ` Randy.Dunlap
2001-09-20 21:10 ` Robert Love
2001-09-20 21:35 ` Dieter Nützel
2001-09-20 22:03 ` Oliver Xymoron
2001-09-20 22:51 ` Dieter Nützel
[not found] ` <200109202252.f8KMqLG17327@zero.tech9.net>
2001-09-21 3:17 ` Robert Love
2001-09-21 15:48 ` george anzinger
2001-09-22 21:09 ` Dieter Nützel
2001-09-22 23:40 ` safemode
2001-09-22 23:46 ` Dieter Nützel
2001-09-23 0:15 ` safemode
[not found] ` <200109222340.BAA37547@blipp.internet5.net>
2001-09-23 0:38 ` Roger Larsson
2001-09-23 1:42 ` safemode
2001-09-23 3:02 ` Robert Love
2001-09-23 16:43 ` Roger Larsson
2001-09-23 0:42 ` Dieter Nützel
[not found] ` <200109222341.f8MNfnG25152@zero.tech9.net>
2001-09-23 2:50 ` Robert Love
2001-09-23 3:14 ` george anzinger
2001-09-23 4:06 ` Dieter Nützel
[not found] ` <200109222347.f8MNlMG25157@zero.tech9.net>
2001-09-23 2:54 ` Robert Love
2001-09-27 0:02 ` [reiserfs-list] " Dieter Nützel
[not found] ` <200109230016.f8N0G6G25222@zero.tech9.net>
2001-09-23 2:58 ` Robert Love
[not found] ` <200109222120.f8MLKYG24859@zero.tech9.net>
2001-09-23 2:44 ` Robert Love
[not found] ` <200109200757.JAA60995@blipp.internet5.net>
2001-09-20 17:37 ` Roger Larsson
2001-09-20 21:29 ` Robert Love
2001-09-20 21:53 ` Dieter Nützel
[not found] ` <200109200758.f8K7wEG13675@zero.tech9.net>
2001-09-20 21:09 ` Robert Love
2001-09-20 20:01 ` Tobias Diedrich
2001-09-20 22:01 ` Robert Love
2001-09-22 3:57 ` Andre Pang
2001-09-22 6:10 ` Robert Love
2001-09-22 7:22 ` Andre Pang
2001-09-23 3:18 ` george anzinger
2001-09-23 3:21 ` Robert Love
2001-09-23 7:05 ` Robert Love
2001-09-23 12:03 ` Andre Pang
2001-09-23 18:31 ` Robert Love [this message]
2001-09-22 12:56 ` ksoftirqd? (Was: Re: [PATCH] Preemption Latency Measurement Tool) Roger Larsson
2001-09-22 13:14 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2001-09-22 20:51 ` Roger Larsson
2001-09-22 21:33 ` Andrea Arcangeli
[not found] <200109202253.RAA21082@waste.org>
2001-09-20 23:15 ` [PATCH] Preemption Latency Measurement Tool Oliver Xymoron
2001-09-21 0:42 ` Roger Larsson
2001-09-21 1:03 ` Alan Cox
2001-09-21 1:22 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2001-09-21 1:51 ` Rik van Riel
2001-09-21 1:38 ` Roger Larsson
2001-09-21 1:53 ` Roger Larsson
2001-09-21 2:08 ` Roger Larsson
2001-09-21 2:29 ` Rik van Riel
2001-09-21 16:24 ` Jussi Laako
2001-09-21 16:36 ` Alan Cox
2001-09-21 18:46 ` Thomas Sailer
2001-09-22 10:30 ` Jussi Laako
2001-09-21 16:18 ` Stefan Westerfeld
2001-09-21 20:18 ` Dieter Nützel
[not found] ` <200109212018.f8LKImG21229@zero.tech9.net>
2001-09-21 21:47 ` Robert Love
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2002-04-09 5:23 [PATCH] preemption latency measurement tool Robert Love
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1001269889.1325.3.camel@phantasy \
--to=rml@tech9.net \
--cc=Dieter.Nuetzel@hamburg.de \
--cc=george@mvista.com \
--cc=iafilius@xs4all.nl \
--cc=ilsensine@inwind.it \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=ozone@algorithm.com.au \
--cc=safemode@speakeasy.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.