sorry about the previous bogus message, i fat-fingered the rewrap button... :(
On 01/27/2010 09:11 PM, Stéphane Letz wrote: > > Le 27 janv. 2010 à 21:02, Jörn Nettingsmeier a écrit : >> i didn't think too much about jack2's apparent overhead, since it >> has the benefit of scaling to smp, which usually affects the >> single-processor case (my box is a single-core amd64). it would be >> interesting to see if torben's approach is able to deliver the same >> latencies as jack1, while adding smp support. > Well "jack2's apparent overhead," is something new for me, and would > require some deeper test/feedback to understand better. Moreover > without more precise description of xruns occurrence (at what DSP CPU > does it start to happen.. etc..) , what kind of setup (jack2 version, > jack configuration, applications used....), it is again hard to > understand/correct things. well, as i said, it was nothing really conclusive (i'm not going to waste much time to go from 128/2 to 64/2, diminishing returns...), and my box is generally under-powered for what i do with it. in short, i figured it's not significant really. i merely added this here in case there's a general picture emerging... it wasn't even intended as criticism. and even if it turned out jack2 would be one step worse than jack1, that's not at all a big price to pay for smp imho. same with the kernel: an smp build does degrade performance on an up box, but who cares, really? you can't even buy up workstations any more, and nature dictates that single-core performance has hit its limit... luck has it that my mobo just got fried, so chances are i'll be contributing some nice quad-core data in the near future - if only my customers paid their bills on time... best, jörn _______________________________________________ Linux-audio-dev mailing list Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
