From: Free Ekanayaka <free@agnula.org>
To: Lee Revell <rlrevell@joe-job.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
Eric St-Laurent <ericstl34@sympatico.ca>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"K.R. Foley" <kr@cybsft.com>,
Felipe Alfaro Solana <lkml@felipe-alfaro.com>,
Daniel Schmitt <pnambic@unu.nu>,
Mark_H_Johnson@raytheon.com,
"P.O. Gaillard" <pierre-olivier.gaillard@fr.thalesgroup.com>,
nando@ccrma.stanford.edu, luke@audioslack.com
Subject: Re: [patch] voluntary-preempt-2.6.9-rc1-bk4-R0
Date: Fri, 03 Sep 2004 11:05:35 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <877jrbiuxs.fsf@agnula.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1094198755.19760.133.camel@krustophenia.net> (Lee Revell's message of "Fri, 03 Sep 2004 04:05:55 -0400")
|--==> "LR" == Lee Revell <rlrevell@joe-job.com> writes:
LR> On Fri, 2004-09-03 at 03:50, Free Ekanayaka wrote:
LR> As far as I am concerned the VP patches are stable enough for the
LR> audio-centric distros to start distributing VP kernel packages, these
LR> will certainly be using the vanilla kernel. I think the PlanetCCRMA and
LR> AGNULA people are planning to start distributing test VP-kernel packages
LR> as soon as the patches stabilize. IIRC Nando is on vacation this week.
>>
LR> I will make an announcement on LAD that as of R0 the VP patches should
LR> be stable and are ready for wider testing. You may want to wait until
LR> after the initial slew of bug reports before rebasing VP against MM. I
LR> suspect most of the problems with be driver specific, and most of the
LR> fixes will apply equally to -mm and vanilla.
>>
LR> I have added Luke (AudioSlack), Free (AGNULA), and Nando (CCRMA) to the
LR> cc: list. They would be in the best position to answer your question.
>>
>>Yes, you're right. We plan to provide test 2.6.x packages as soon as
>>patches stabilise. Please let me know if you have some recommendation
>>(configuration flags, additional patches, etc.).
>>
LR> As of -R0 it's definitely stable on UP and SMP users are reporting the
LR> same. All known problems should be fixed, and there are no known
LR> regressions. You should probably post a UP version and have your users
LR> test that before posting SMP packages, the latter are not quite as well
LR> tested.
LR> No other patches (ie various scheduler tweaks, CK) should be necessary,
LR> and in fact are not recommended because they might mask latency issues
LR> that we would rather fix.
LR> I use Debian unstable which should be pretty close to AGNULA, and for
LR> several weeks now I have been unable to produce an xrun in jack at 32
LR> frames no matter what I throw at the machine. I actually have not had
LR> xrun debugging enabled in weeks because I don't get any xruns.
LR> Any problems at this point are most likely going to involve less common
LR> hardware, stuff the LKML testers don't have.
A/DeMuDi is based on a sarge snapshot (currently 17 July.. time to
shift forward!), plus some bits of sid (especially up to date audio
packages).
Which kernel tree are you using?
Have you built your kernel starting from the stock kernel-source-2.6.8
package along with the relevant debian patch?
Cheers,
Free
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-09-03 9:09 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 73+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-08-30 19:13 [patch] voluntary-preempt-2.6.9-rc1-bk4-Q5 Mark_H_Johnson
2004-08-30 19:21 ` Ingo Molnar
2004-09-01 12:31 ` [patch] voluntary-preempt-2.6.9-rc1-bk4-Q5 - netdev_max_back_log is too small P.O. Gaillard
2004-09-01 13:05 ` Ingo Molnar
2004-09-02 11:24 ` [patch] voluntary-preempt-2.6.9-rc1-bk4-Q6 - network is no longer smooth P.O. Gaillard
2004-09-02 11:28 ` Ingo Molnar
2004-09-02 15:26 ` P.O. Gaillard
2004-08-31 8:49 ` [patch] voluntary-preempt-2.6.9-rc1-bk4-Q5 Ingo Molnar
2004-09-02 6:33 ` Ingo Molnar
2004-09-02 6:55 ` [patch] voluntary-preempt-2.6.9-rc1-bk4-Q8 Ingo Molnar
2004-09-02 7:04 ` Lee Revell
2004-09-02 7:15 ` Ingo Molnar
2004-09-02 7:31 ` Lee Revell
2004-09-02 7:46 ` Ingo Molnar
2004-09-03 1:10 ` Rusty Russell
2004-09-02 23:25 ` Lee Revell
2004-09-02 23:28 ` Ingo Molnar
2004-09-02 23:32 ` Lee Revell
2004-09-02 7:17 ` Ingo Molnar
2004-09-02 8:23 ` Ingo Molnar
2004-09-02 11:10 ` [patch] voluntary-preempt-2.6.9-rc1-bk4-Q9 Ingo Molnar
2004-09-02 12:14 ` Thomas Charbonnel
2004-09-02 13:16 ` Thomas Charbonnel
2004-09-02 13:23 ` Ingo Molnar
2004-09-02 14:38 ` Thomas Charbonnel
2004-09-02 21:57 ` [patch] voluntary-preempt-2.6.9-rc1-bk4-R0 Ingo Molnar
2004-09-02 22:06 ` Lee Revell
2004-09-02 22:14 ` Ingo Molnar
2004-09-02 22:15 ` Lee Revell
2004-09-03 0:24 ` Lee Revell
2004-09-03 3:17 ` Eric St-Laurent
2004-09-03 6:26 ` Lee Revell
2004-09-03 6:36 ` Ingo Molnar
2004-09-03 6:49 ` Lee Revell
2004-09-03 7:01 ` Ingo Molnar
2004-09-03 7:05 ` Ingo Molnar
2004-09-03 7:40 ` Lee Revell
2004-09-03 7:50 ` Free Ekanayaka
2004-09-03 8:05 ` Lee Revell
2004-09-03 9:05 ` Free Ekanayaka [this message]
2004-09-03 9:25 ` [patch] voluntary-preempt-2.6.9-rc1-bk4-R1 Ingo Molnar
2004-09-03 9:50 ` Luke Yelavich
2004-09-03 10:29 ` Ingo Molnar
2004-09-03 10:43 ` Luke Yelavich
2004-09-03 11:33 ` Thomas Charbonnel
2004-09-03 11:49 ` Ingo Molnar
2004-09-03 12:05 ` Thomas Charbonnel
2004-09-03 16:14 ` Thomas Charbonnel
2004-09-03 17:36 ` Thomas Charbonnel
2004-09-03 11:36 ` [patch] voluntary-preempt-2.6.9-rc1-bk4-R2 Ingo Molnar
2004-09-03 8:09 ` [patch] voluntary-preempt-2.6.9-rc1-bk4-R0 Luke Yelavich
2004-09-03 8:13 ` Lee Revell
2004-09-03 8:21 ` Luke Yelavich
2004-09-03 12:52 ` Luke Yelavich
2004-09-03 18:09 ` K.R. Foley
2004-09-03 11:04 ` K.R. Foley
2004-09-03 17:02 ` K.R. Foley
2004-09-03 20:40 ` Lee Revell
2004-09-03 17:10 ` K.R. Foley
2004-09-03 18:17 ` Ingo Molnar
2004-09-03 18:36 ` K.R. Foley
2004-09-03 19:30 ` [patch] voluntary-preempt-2.6.9-rc1-bk4-R3 Ingo Molnar
2004-09-03 19:49 ` K.R. Foley
2004-09-04 3:39 ` K.R. Foley
2004-09-04 3:43 ` K.R. Foley
2004-09-04 6:41 ` Ingo Molnar
2004-09-04 12:28 ` K.R. Foley
2004-09-04 8:57 ` Ingo Molnar
2004-09-04 10:16 ` Lee Revell
2004-09-04 14:35 ` K.R. Foley
2004-09-04 20:05 ` Ingo Molnar
2004-09-03 18:39 ` [patch] voluntary-preempt-2.6.9-rc1-bk4-R0 Ingo Molnar
2004-09-03 18:41 ` K.R. Foley
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=877jrbiuxs.fsf@agnula.org \
--to=free@agnula.org \
--cc=Mark_H_Johnson@raytheon.com \
--cc=ericstl34@sympatico.ca \
--cc=kr@cybsft.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lkml@felipe-alfaro.com \
--cc=luke@audioslack.com \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=nando@ccrma.stanford.edu \
--cc=pierre-olivier.gaillard@fr.thalesgroup.com \
--cc=pnambic@unu.nu \
--cc=rlrevell@joe-job.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