From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261691AbULBRHN (ORCPT ); Thu, 2 Dec 2004 12:07:13 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261692AbULBRHN (ORCPT ); Thu, 2 Dec 2004 12:07:13 -0500 Received: from mail.joq.us ([67.65.12.105]:6579 "EHLO sulphur.joq.us") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261691AbULBRHD (ORCPT ); Thu, 2 Dec 2004 12:07:03 -0500 To: Florian Schmidt Cc: Andrew Burgess , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, jackit-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: [Jackit-devel] Re: Real-Time Preemption, -RT-2.6.10-rc2-mm3-V0.7.31-19 References: <200412021546.iB2FkK5a005502@cichlid.com> <20041202170315.067d7853@mango.fruits.de> <87y8ggekds.fsf@sulphur.joq.us> <20041202175756.0e50f101@mango.fruits.de> From: "Jack O'Quin" Date: 02 Dec 2004 11:07:39 -0600 In-Reply-To: <20041202175756.0e50f101@mango.fruits.de> Message-ID: <87hdn4eihw.fsf@sulphur.joq.us> User-Agent: Gnus/5.0808 (Gnus v5.8.8) XEmacs/21.4 (Common Lisp) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Florian Schmidt writes: > I suppose instead of catching the signal the user might just monitor the > syslog. I'm not sure there's printk's triggered by thisalready , but i'm > sure if not, ingo might add them. So a trivial patch for jackd would > probably look like this: > > --- libjack/client.c.orig 2004-12-02 17:55:04.000000000 +0100 > +++ libjack/client.c 2004-12-02 17:56:23.000000000 +0100 > @@ -1238,6 +1238,9 @@ > if (control->sync_cb) > jack_call_sync_client (client); > > + // enable atomicity check for RP kernels > + gettimeofday(1,1); > + > if (control->process) { > if (control->process (control->nframes, > control->process_arg) > @@ -1247,7 +1250,10 @@ > } else { > control->state = Finished; > } > - > + > + // disable atomicity check > + gettimeofday(0,1); > + > if (control->timebase_cb) > jack_call_timebase_master (client); > The sync_cb and timebase_cb callbacks actually need to be RT-safe, too. ;-) Is printk() guaranteed not to wait inside the kernel? I am not familiar with its internal implementation. -- joq