From: J Sloan <joe@tmsusa.com>
To: Jaroslav Kysela <perex@suse.cz>
Cc: J Sloan <jjs@lexus.com>,
"Wayne.Brown@altec.com" <Wayne.Brown@altec.com>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: 2.5.7 make modules_install error (oss)
Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2002 01:17:13 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3C985399.2090709@tmsusa.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.33.0203200923380.715-100000@pnote.perex-int.cz>
Jaroslav Kysela wrote:
>On Tue, 19 Mar 2002, J Sloan wrote:
>
>>Agreed, the oss drivers should _at least_
>>be maintained as an alternative, e.g. for
>>those of us who want reliable sound with
>>*low latency*
>>
>><explanation>
>>I haven't checked lately, but not too long
>>ago the alsa drivers were found to be one
>>of the worst sources of latency in the kernel.
>></explanation>
>>
>
>You should really take care about your words. You've not written any
>technical reason to say these sentences.
>
Fair enough - I don't see any technical
reasons why alsa *couldn't* perform as
well, latency wise, as oss.
>We are not aware about any
>problems against low-latency.
>
Some folks on this list had been doing latency
profiling on their kernels during the past year
(sorry, I don't remember the exact dates) and
surprisingly the alsa driver was showing up
as one of the top sources of latency - IIRC one
possible explanation was "in-kernel mixing".
>Sure, OSS API emulation is only emulation,
>so there is additional layer which can be a bit slower than simplified
>native OSS drivers, but using ALSA API, we get really serious latencies
>even for multichannel hardware.
>
Thanks for the feedback, I'll have to do some
testing of my own and see what the situation
is at this point - I'd be very happy to learn that
my concerns are outdated and already resolved.
Joe
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2002-03-20 9:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-03-19 16:48 2.5.7 make modules_install error (oss) Wayne.Brown
2002-03-19 17:15 ` Alan Cox
2002-03-19 18:51 ` J Sloan
2002-03-19 19:14 ` Alan Cox
2002-03-19 19:07 ` J Sloan
2002-03-20 8:30 ` Jaroslav Kysela
2002-03-20 9:17 ` J Sloan [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2002-03-19 14:10 bonganilinux
2002-03-19 6:24 Corporal Pisang
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=3C985399.2090709@tmsusa.com \
--to=joe@tmsusa.com \
--cc=Wayne.Brown@altec.com \
--cc=jjs@lexus.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=perex@suse.cz \
/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