Re: [PATCH] [request for inclusion] Realtime LSM

Matt Mackall
2005-01-11T20:06:41Z

On Tue, Jan 11, 2005 at 01:57:11PM -0600, Jack O'Quin wrote:
> Matt Mackall <mpm@selenic.com> writes:
>
> > On Tue, Jan 11, 2005 at 08:30:50AM -0600, Jack O'Quin wrote:
> >> "Near-RT" is about the most useless concept I've heard of in a long
> >> time. It sounds like the answer to a question nobody asked. ;-)
> >
> > To my way of thinking, it's a pretty good description of Ingo's work
> > or anything you're ever going to see on a PC. If you think you're
> > going to get real hard RT performance on your off-the-shelf x86 box
> > running a conventional OS, you are fooling yourself.
> >
> > Thankfully a buffer underrun is no more fatal for pro audio than a
> > broken guitar string. CDs skip, DATs glitch, XLR cables flake out,
> > circuit breakers trip, amps clip, Powerbooks crash, and the show goes
> > on. I've done more than enough stage tech to know it's a huge pain in
> > the ass, but let's stop pretending we require absolute perfection,
> > please.
>
> In _practice_, Ingo's patches are considerably better than what you
> seem to consider "good enough for mere audio work".

Eh? I never implied mainstream was good enough.

What I said was that high priority SCHED_OTHER could be made good
enough and that that would be preferable to SCHED_FIFO in many cases.

Anyway, *plonk*.

--
Mathematics is the supreme nostalgia of our time.