Re: Latency results with 2.6.10 - looks good

[Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>]

* Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> wrote:

> Lee Revell <rlrevell@joe-job.com> wrote:
> >
> > Followup: other audio users have confirmed that 2.6.10 is the best
> >  release yet latency-wise.  It works most of the time at 64 frames
> >  (~1.33ms latency).
> > 
> >  Now, the bad news: there are still enough xruns to make it not quite
> >  good enough for, say, a recording studio; as we all know with realtime
> >  constraints the worst case scenario is important.
> 
> The kernel which you should be testing is most-recent -mm.  The -mm
> kernels have had a bunch of latency improvements which are queued for
> 2.6.11.  We need to know how that stuff performs - 2.6.10 is largely
> uninteresting from a development POV.

i think Lee is well aware of that - nevertheless his data point shows
that even the relatively low number of latency fixes that went into
2.6.10 (compared to what is pending in -mm and in -RT) are a step in the
right direction. I'd guess the biggest win was the ACPI related latency
fix, and maybe the softirq fixes.

	Ingo