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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox