From: Christian Meder <chris@onestepahead.de>
To: Nick Piggin <piggin@cyberone.com.au>
Cc: Con Kolivas <kernel@kolivas.org>,
linux kernel mailing list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
William Lee Irwin III <wli@holomorphy.com>
Subject: Re: 2.6 vs 2.4 regression when running gnomemeeting
Date: Sat, 20 Dec 2003 06:15:16 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1071897314.1363.43.camel@localhost> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3FE3D0CB.603@cyberone.com.au>
On Sat, 2003-12-20 at 05:32, Nick Piggin wrote:
> Christian Meder wrote:
>
> >On Sat, 2003-12-20 at 04:50, Nick Piggin wrote:
> >
> >>(although not much Con)
> >>
> >
> >right. Ok I'm running now 2.6.0 with Nick's v28p1: The results without
> >load and with kernel compile load are attached. On nice level 0 I get
> >now the stuttering sound which I described in the previous mail. When I
> >renice gnomemeeting to -10 it's actually usable but not as good as in
> >2.4.2x. It's still sensitive to window movement and X activity. Two
> >subjective observations are that the nice levels haven't got such a big
> >impact in Nick's scheduler they used to have and that the default
> >behaviour gnomemeetingwise is better than in earlier Nick schedulers.
> >
>
> No, nice levels don't have such a big impact. That is the last big
> think I have to fix, but thats another story...
>
> At nice -10, there is basically nothing more the scheduler can do
> for it (nice -20 will be a tiny bit better again).
>
> I'd say its due to either sound drivers or your app doing something
> different when running in 2.6.
I just tried hammering on the sound drivers on the playback side. So I
put on a kernel compile, a find | cat >/dev/null and ogg123 playback.
Playback performed largely unimpressed from the load level, no skips or
whatever. Even adding a gnomemeeting connection didn't decrease audio
playback. My guess is that the audio drivers are ok even more so because
otherwise OSS _and_ ALSA would be broken for my soundcard.
That would leave me with two possibilities: 2.6. is doing something
different in the gnomemeeting case or gnomemeeting is doing something
different in the 2.6 case. A cursory look at the gnomemeeting sources
didn't give me the impression that it's doing anything which would be
affected by 2.6 deployment but I'll ask on the gnomemeeting-devel list
for advice.
Thanks for all your help, I hope I can nail it soon,
Christian
--
Christian Meder, email: chris@onestepahead.de
What's the railroad to me ?
I never go to see
Where it ends.
It fills a few hollows,
And makes banks for the swallows,
It sets the sand a-blowing,
And the blackberries a-growing.
(Henry David Thoreau)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-12-20 5:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 35+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-12-19 20:11 2.6 vs 2.4 regression when running gnomemeeting Christian Meder
2003-12-19 20:32 ` William Lee Irwin III
2003-12-19 23:30 ` Christian Meder
2003-12-20 0:21 ` Nick Piggin
2003-12-20 0:37 ` Christian Meder
2003-12-20 0:48 ` Nick Piggin
2003-12-20 1:11 ` Christian Meder
2003-12-20 1:26 ` Nick Piggin
2003-12-20 1:52 ` Christian Meder
2003-12-20 2:38 ` Nick Piggin
2003-12-20 2:55 ` Con Kolivas
2003-12-20 3:32 ` Christian Meder
2003-12-20 3:50 ` Nick Piggin
2003-12-20 4:16 ` Christian Meder
2003-12-20 4:32 ` Nick Piggin
2003-12-20 5:15 ` Christian Meder [this message]
2003-12-20 8:31 ` Con Kolivas
2003-12-20 11:19 ` Ingo Molnar
2003-12-20 16:17 ` Christian Meder
2003-12-20 16:49 ` Christian Meder
2003-12-20 17:42 ` Ingo Molnar
2003-12-21 1:40 ` Christian Meder
2003-12-21 8:57 ` Ingo Molnar
2003-12-22 1:19 ` Christian Meder
2003-12-22 1:47 ` Con Kolivas
2003-12-22 8:48 ` Ingo Molnar
2003-12-20 23:29 ` Nick Piggin
2003-12-20 22:20 ` Matthias Andree
2003-12-21 19:23 ` Jens Axboe
2003-12-22 10:54 ` Andrew McGregor
2003-12-22 11:15 ` Con Kolivas
2003-12-22 12:51 ` Ingo Molnar
2003-12-22 13:25 ` Nick Piggin
2003-12-20 19:34 ` Marc Schiffbauer
2003-12-21 1:49 ` Christian Meder
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=1071897314.1363.43.camel@localhost \
--to=chris@onestepahead.de \
--cc=kernel@kolivas.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=piggin@cyberone.com.au \
--cc=wli@holomorphy.com \
/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.