On Mon, 2009-06-22 at 00:15 +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote: > On Sun, 21.06.09 11:09, Paul Davis (p...@linuxaudiosystems.com) wrote: > > I cannot imagine wanting to use this mechanism. You also seem to > > have assumed that everyone agrees that SCHED_RR is the correct > > policy, rather than SCHED_FIFO. > > If people can make a good case for SCHED_FIFO, then fine, we can add > that to rtkit. > > Personally, I believe that RR vs. FIFO is not so much a decision that the > programmer should make. I think this is more a decision for the admin, > because this influences fairness between consumers of RT.
It is, ultimately, a decision for the _user_ to make. RealtimeKit should also take that into account. As a user doing critical audio, say, in a concert situation, I'd require that my computer's realtime audio tasks can use 99.9% of the cpu for short amounts of time. I don't care if the rest of the user processes are momentarily slowed down (up to a point, of course). I would very much care if my computer, due to a temporary overload, decides to a) glitch the audio and b) demote the rt process to SCHED_OTHER permanently. It looks like the RealtimeKit is designed to do exactly that by default. If that is the case, how can I regain control of what I can do without having to resort to extreme cases of root configuration file magic, etc, etc (what RealtimeKit is supposed to avoid). -- Fernando _______________________________________________ Linux-audio-dev mailing list Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
