From: Lee Revell <rlrevell@joe-job.com>
To: Fernando Pablo Lopez-Lezcano <nando@ccrma.Stanford.EDU>
Cc: linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
jackit-devel <jackit-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: 2.4.x vs 2.6.x: denormal handling and audio performance
Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 21:00:07 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1092099606.22613.12.camel@mindpipe> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1092079195.16794.257.camel@cmn37.stanford.edu>
On Mon, 2004-08-09 at 15:19, Fernando Pablo Lopez-Lezcano wrote:
> Hi all, I've been trying to track weird behavior I'm experiencing when
> trying to use 2.6.x for "pro audio" applications and I think I have
> something to report (and some questions).
>
> First, the environment. I'm running the Jack low latency server on top
> of two different software installs on the same hardware, one is FC1 +
> 2.4.26 + low latency and preemption patches, the other is FC2 + 2.6.7
> rc2-mm2 + voluntary preemption O3. They are different hard disks swapped
> into the same P4 laptop. Both are running the same source code versions
> of all the audio programs that I use to test (but _not_ the same
> binaries, each one is built in the environment it runs on).
>
Have you tried using the exact same binaries under both 2.4 and 2.6?
This would rule out a compiler issue.
In case anyone thinks this is an application bug, here are some links
pertaining to the P4 denormals-are-zero issue, these were at the bottom
of Fernando's post:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2001-07/msg02162.html
http://lkml.org/lkml/2003/5/9/144
Lee
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-08-10 1:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-08-09 19:19 2.4.x vs 2.6.x: denormal handling and audio performance Fernando Pablo Lopez-Lezcano
2004-08-10 1:00 ` Lee Revell [this message]
2004-08-10 1:09 ` Lee Revell
2004-08-10 2:35 ` Fernando Pablo Lopez-Lezcano
2004-08-10 5:28 ` Lee Revell
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=1092099606.22613.12.camel@mindpipe \
--to=rlrevell@joe-job.com \
--cc=jackit-devel@lists.sourceforge.net \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=nando@ccrma.Stanford.EDU \
/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.