From: watermodem <aquamodem@ameritech.net>
To: Matti Aarnio <matti.aarnio@zmailer.org>
Cc: "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Jiffy question and sound.
Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2001 22:22:19 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3AB6DAFB.1E8F14DB@ameritech.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3AB5A53F.F8B0373B@ameritech.net> <20010319114615.E23336@mea-ext.zmailer.org>
Matti Aarnio wrote:
>
> On Mon, Mar 19, 2001 at 12:20:47AM -0600, watermodem wrote:
> > With the 2.4.0 kernel the loops_per_sec field was replaced (for i386)
> > with current_cpu_data.loops_per_jiffy.
> ...
> > #define LOOPS_PER_SEC current_cpu_data.loops_per_jiffy * 100
>
> The intention was to accomodate systems with faster than 2 GHz clock
> at which the LOOPS_PER_SEC counter spins around a bit too fast..
> ('signed long' at i386 handles 0..2G just fine, then it thinks the sign
> got inverted.. 'unsigned long' works fine until 4 GHz processors.)
>
My sound card uses ALSA and ALSA wasn't available yet for
the new kernel. So.. Noting that LOOPS_PER_SEC was what
failed in the kernel I modified it and compiled. I am
not associated in anyway with the ALSA folks just wanted
too listen to music while working away. I have no idea
why it needs it or if it is busy-looping... (I hope not).
> Why does the ALSA need LOOPS_PER_SEC ?
> Is it doing timing by busy-looping ?
>
> > Now compiling the same ALSA modules with 2.4.2 this problem happens
> > much quicker and you don't need any other activity. In fact it is hard
> > to play more than half a song. (MP3)
> > It doesn't matter if what set of music players or tools I use the
> > problem is quite visible.
> >
> > When I boot back to the original 2.2.x kernel everything is perfect.
> >
> > So I guess I have a few questions here.
> > 1) Is a jiffy 100th of a second or is it smaller (so my loop count
> > is starving things.) (10ms) ?
>
> "HZ" is the answer. E.g. Alpha has HZ=1024, while i386 has HZ=100
> Nearly all architectures have different values based on what some
> other UNIX uses at given system.
>
> > 2) Why is it so much worse in 2.4.2 than 2.4.0?
> > 3) Any other "gotch's" that are important to watch for when moving
> > 2.2.x drivers to 2.4.x?
>
> The FAQ may have some pointers to "porting drivers to 2.4" documents.
>
> > Thanks....
> > Watermodem
> > -
> > Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
>
> /Matti Aarnio
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2001-03-20 4:23 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2001-03-19 6:20 Jiffy question and sound watermodem
2001-03-19 9:46 ` Matti Aarnio
2001-03-20 4:22 ` watermodem [this message]
2001-03-20 4:53 ` watermodem
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=3AB6DAFB.1E8F14DB@ameritech.net \
--to=aquamodem@ameritech.net \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=matti.aarnio@zmailer.org \
/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