Re: alsa-driver-1.0.24 on linux-2.6.33-29-realtime

[Alessio Igor Bogani]

Hi Takashi,

2011/2/23 Takashi Sakamoto :
> Hi,
>
> This is a report to install alsa-driver-1.0.24 on linux-realtime from
> abogani's PPA.
>
> The version of alsa-driver (ALSA kernel module) installed in
> linux-realtime is 1.0.22 and unfortunately I can't change the sampling
> rates of my device (Creative EMU 0404 USB) by alsamixer. But I know
> 1.0.23 or later can change it so I have a need to install newer alsa-driver.
[...]

What do you think about make a package and upload it into my PPA?

Ciao,
Alessio

-- 
Ubuntu-Studio-users mailing list
Ubuntu-Studio-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-users

alsa-driver-1.0.24 on linux-2.6.33-29-realtime

[Takashi Sakamoto]

Hi,

This is a report to install alsa-driver-1.0.24 on linux-realtime from
abogani's PPA.

The version of alsa-driver (ALSA kernel module) installed in
linux-realtime is 1.0.22 and unfortunately I can't change the sampling
rates of my device (Creative EMU 0404 USB) by alsamixer. But I know
1.0.23 or later can change it so I have a need to install newer alsa-driver.

1. get alsa-driver-1.0.24 from alsa-project.
http://www.alsa-project.org/

2. ./configure and I realized that the debug messages tell me there is
no linux/config.h.

3. I search on WWW and find "linux/config.h" should be replaced to
"linux/autoconf.h". But linux-realtime tree doesn't have this. It has
"generated/autoconf.h" with using "$ locate autoconf.h".

4. I use eclipse IDE to replace whole line of "linux/config.h" to
"generated/config.h".

5. Then ./configure -> make -> make install;

6. reboot

7. It works fine.


To replace lines I have no other idea than using eclipse so there seems
to be better ways. Please tell me if you know good ways.

Regards


Takashi Sakamoto
o-taka...@sakamocchi.jp

-- 
Ubuntu-Studio-users mailing list
Ubuntu-Studio-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-users

Re: maverick realtime kernel

[Bernard Hurley]

On Thu, Nov 11, 2010 at 08:55:31AM -0600, Brian Bergstrom wrote:
> On 11/11/10 6:43 AM, Gerhard Lang wrote:
> >
> > Am 11.11.2010 06:03, schrieb Brian Bergstrom:
> >
> >> On Wednesday, November 10, 2010 06:59:52 pm Mike Holstein wrote:
> >>
> >>  
> >>> found this great link
> >>> http://jackschnippes.freeunix.net/index.php/2010/11/04/lowlatency-kernel-an
> >>> d-realtime-kernel-for-ubuntu-10-10-maverick
> >>>
> >>> ...all kinds of goodies at this site, including this 'how-to' for using 
> >>> the
> >>> natty realtime or lowlatency kernels with maverick 10.10
> >>>
> >>>
> >> Any chance these kernels would run on Lucid KX Studio too?
> >>
> >> -Brian
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>  
> > Abogani's kernel ppa already is linked in kxstudio and 2.6.33-29-realtime 
> > works fine for me in lucid as well as in maverick :). Only problem: no 
> > working proprietary driver Nvidia 173.14.x -->   no 3d/split/dual screen. 
> > No problem on my notebook with intel graphics.
> >
> > http://kxstudio.sourceforge.net/index.php?option=com_content&view=category&layout=blog&id=21&Itemid=14
> > (bottom left, click Real-Time/Low-Latency Kernels)
> >
> > best regards Gerhard
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
I've been using the abogani kernel for some time wiyh maverick on my Dell 
Inspiron 1525 laptop for some time with no ill effects. I do 
have the regular kernel installed jus in case i need it.

Bernard

> The PPA is already link, but its only for lucid packages.  I had to 
> download and install them manually.  Which worked great by the way. 
> 2.6.36 lowlatency 32bit with open source radeon drivers.
> I mentioned the good results to falktx and he is going ot replace the 
> deprecated 2.6.35 kernel from abogani with the 2.6.36 one.
> 
> -brian
> 
> -- 
> Ubuntu-Studio-users mailing list
> Ubuntu-Studio-users@lists.ubuntu.com
> Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-users

-- 
Ubuntu-Studio-users mailing list
Ubuntu-Studio-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-users

Re: maverick realtime kernel

[Kenneth Koym]

Brian but do these "goodies" work compatibly on Lucid Lynx?


On Thu, Nov 11, 2010 at 8:55 AM, Brian Bergstrom  wrote:

> On 11/11/10 6:43 AM, Gerhard Lang wrote:
> >
> > Am 11.11.2010 06:03, schrieb Brian Bergstrom:
> >
> >> On Wednesday, November 10, 2010 06:59:52 pm Mike Holstein wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>> found this great link
> >>>
> http://jackschnippes.freeunix.net/index.php/2010/11/04/lowlatency-kernel-an
> >>> d-realtime-kernel-for-ubuntu-10-10-maverick
> >>>
> >>> ...all kinds of goodies at this site, including this 'how-to' for using
> the
> >>> natty realtime or lowlatency kernels with maverick 10.10
> >>>
> >>>
> >> Any chance these kernels would run on Lucid KX Studio too?
> >>
> >> -Brian
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> > Abogani's kernel ppa already is linked in kxstudio and 2.6.33-29-realtime
> works fine for me in lucid as well as in maverick :). Only problem: no
> working proprietary driver Nvidia 173.14.x -->   no 3d/split/dual screen. No
> problem on my notebook with intel graphics.
> >
> >
> http://kxstudio.sourceforge.net/index.php?option=com_content&view=category&layout=blog&id=21&Itemid=14
> > (bottom left, click Real-Time/Low-Latency Kernels)
> >
> > best regards Gerhard
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> The PPA is already link, but its only for lucid packages.  I had to
> download and install them manually.  Which worked great by the way.
> 2.6.36 lowlatency 32bit with open source radeon drivers.
> I mentioned the good results to falktx and he is going ot replace the
> deprecated 2.6.35 kernel from abogani with the 2.6.36 one.
>
> -brian
>
> --
> Ubuntu-Studio-users mailing list
> Ubuntu-Studio-users@lists.ubuntu.com
> Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-users
>
-- 
Ubuntu-Studio-users mailing list
Ubuntu-Studio-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-users

Re: maverick realtime kernel

[Brian Bergstrom]

On 11/11/10 6:43 AM, Gerhard Lang wrote:
>
> Am 11.11.2010 06:03, schrieb Brian Bergstrom:
>
>> On Wednesday, November 10, 2010 06:59:52 pm Mike Holstein wrote:
>>
>>  
>>> found this great link
>>> http://jackschnippes.freeunix.net/index.php/2010/11/04/lowlatency-kernel-an
>>> d-realtime-kernel-for-ubuntu-10-10-maverick
>>>
>>> ...all kinds of goodies at this site, including this 'how-to' for using the
>>> natty realtime or lowlatency kernels with maverick 10.10
>>>
>>>
>> Any chance these kernels would run on Lucid KX Studio too?
>>
>> -Brian
>>
>>
>>
>>  
> Abogani's kernel ppa already is linked in kxstudio and 2.6.33-29-realtime 
> works fine for me in lucid as well as in maverick :). Only problem: no 
> working proprietary driver Nvidia 173.14.x -->   no 3d/split/dual screen. No 
> problem on my notebook with intel graphics.
>
> http://kxstudio.sourceforge.net/index.php?option=com_content&view=category&layout=blog&id=21&Itemid=14
> (bottom left, click Real-Time/Low-Latency Kernels)
>
> best regards Gerhard
>
>
>
>
>
The PPA is already link, but its only for lucid packages.  I had to 
download and install them manually.  Which worked great by the way. 
2.6.36 lowlatency 32bit with open source radeon drivers.
I mentioned the good results to falktx and he is going ot replace the 
deprecated 2.6.35 kernel from abogani with the 2.6.36 one.

-brian

-- 
Ubuntu-Studio-users mailing list
Ubuntu-Studio-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-users

Re: maverick realtime kernel

[Gerhard Lang]

Am 11.11.2010 06:03, schrieb Brian Bergstrom:
> On Wednesday, November 10, 2010 06:59:52 pm Mike Holstein wrote:
>
>> found this great link
>> http://jackschnippes.freeunix.net/index.php/2010/11/04/lowlatency-kernel-an
>> d-realtime-kernel-for-ubuntu-10-10-maverick
>>
>> ...all kinds of goodies at this site, including this 'how-to' for using the
>> natty realtime or lowlatency kernels with maverick 10.10
>>  
> Any chance these kernels would run on Lucid KX Studio too?
>
> -Brian
>
>
>    

Abogani's kernel ppa already is linked in kxstudio and 2.6.33-29-realtime works 
fine for me in lucid as well as in maverick :). Only problem: no working 
proprietary driver Nvidia 173.14.x -->  no 3d/split/dual screen. No problem on 
my notebook with intel graphics.

http://kxstudio.sourceforge.net/index.php?option=com_content&view=category&layout=blog&id=21&Itemid=14
(bottom left, click Real-Time/Low-Latency Kernels)

best regards Gerhard




-- 
Ubuntu-Studio-users mailing list
Ubuntu-Studio-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-users

Re: maverick realtime kernel

[Mike Holstein]

On Thu, Nov 11, 2010 at 12:03 AM, Brian Bergstrom <
boilingbergst...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Wednesday, November 10, 2010 06:59:52 pm Mike Holstein wrote:
> > found this great link
> >
> http://jackschnippes.freeunix.net/index.php/2010/11/04/lowlatency-kernel-an
> > d-realtime-kernel-for-ubuntu-10-10-maverick
> >
> > ...all kinds of goodies at this site, including this 'how-to' for using
> the
> > natty realtime or lowlatency kernels with maverick 10.10
>
> Any chance these kernels would run on Lucid KX Studio too?
>
> -Brian
>
> --
> Ubuntu-Studio-users mailing list
> Ubuntu-Studio-users@lists.ubuntu.com
> Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-users
>

only one way to find out :)

im probably going to stick to the lucid ones i have from abogani and falk,
but these should be fine to try...

-- 
MH

http://www.myspace.com/mikeholstein

http://opensourcemusician.libsyn.com/
-- 
Ubuntu-Studio-users mailing list
Ubuntu-Studio-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-users

Re: maverick realtime kernel

[Brian Bergstrom]

On Wednesday, November 10, 2010 06:59:52 pm Mike Holstein wrote:
> found this great link
> http://jackschnippes.freeunix.net/index.php/2010/11/04/lowlatency-kernel-an
> d-realtime-kernel-for-ubuntu-10-10-maverick
> 
> ...all kinds of goodies at this site, including this 'how-to' for using the
> natty realtime or lowlatency kernels with maverick 10.10

Any chance these kernels would run on Lucid KX Studio too?

-Brian

-- 
Ubuntu-Studio-users mailing list
Ubuntu-Studio-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-users

maverick realtime kernel

[Mike Holstein]

found this great link
http://jackschnippes.freeunix.net/index.php/2010/11/04/lowlatency-kernel-and-realtime-kernel-for-ubuntu-10-10-maverick

...all kinds of goodies at this site, including this 'how-to' for using the
natty realtime or lowlatency kernels with maverick 10.10

-- 
MH
http://www.myspace.com/mikeholstein

http://opensourcemusician.libsyn.com/
-- 
Ubuntu-Studio-users mailing list
Ubuntu-Studio-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-users

Maverick -lowlatency and -realtime kernel dropped

[Alessio Igor Bogani]

Hi All,

Since no one offer helps for these kernels on Maverick I'll drop
completely these, as promised, from my PPA in two days.
In any case Lucid packages of these kernel rest in place.

Ciao,
Alessio

-- 
Ubuntu-Studio-users mailing list
Ubuntu-Studio-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-users

Re: The different realtime kernels

[Ralf Mardorf]

On Sat, 2010-10-02 at 23:13 -0500, Brian David wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 2, 2010 at 12:12 AM, Ralf Mardorf
>  wrote:
> 
> On Fri, 2010-10-01 at 11:23 -0500, Scott Lavender wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> Indamixx is using 64 Studio, the distro I'm using to produce
> music.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is not entirely correct.  It is using Transmission, as Scott
> said.  I believe Transmission itself is a derivative of 64 Studio.

Pardon, I guess you're right. At least some Indamixx products do use an
OEM version build by the 64 Studio crew.

- Ralf


-- 
Ubuntu-Studio-users mailing list
Ubuntu-Studio-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-users

Re: The different realtime kernels

[Brian David]

On Sat, Oct 2, 2010 at 12:12 AM, Ralf Mardorf wrote:

> On Fri, 2010-10-01 at 11:23 -0500, Scott Lavender wrote:
>
>
> Indamixx is using 64 Studio, the distro I'm using to produce music.
>
>

This is not entirely correct.  It is using Transmission, as Scott said.  I
believe Transmission itself is a derivative of 64 Studio.
-- 
-Brian David
-- 
Ubuntu-Studio-users mailing list
Ubuntu-Studio-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-users

Re: The different realtime kernels

[Ralf Mardorf]

On Fri, 2010-10-01 at 11:23 -0500, Scott Lavender wrote:
> 
> 
> On Fri, Oct 1, 2010 at 7:38 AM, Ralf Mardorf
>  wrote:
> On Thu, 2010-09-30 at 14:10 -0500, Scott Lavender wrote:
> 
> > [snip]
> > This is not a rhetorical question.  I, as Ubuntu Studio
> project lead,
> > would like to include it.  If you can provide a tenable
> method to
> > include the -rt kernel in the Ubuntu Studio ISO image I
> would like to
> > implement it.
> 
> > [snip]
> 
> Hi Scott :)
> 
> I'm not sure, if I do understand the problem.
> 
> Does Ubuntu need the same vanilla kernel version for different
> kind of
> kernels, e.g. to provide packages for proprietary graphic
> modules?
> If so, IMO it's not needed to make the multimedia distro full
> compatible
> with a regular Ubuntu.
> 
> * snip *
> 
> I think you are missing the point.
> 
> It does not matter _why_ certain kernels are maintained and available
> in the repositories.  It only matters _that_ the decision was made.
> 
> The only kernels I can include within a Ubuntu Studio ISO image are
> the kernels available from the official Ubuntu archives.
> 
> Furthermore, I do not decide which kernels may be included in the
> archives.  That ultimate decision is made by others, although I may
> provide some small influence on it.  This is an example of when I
> mentioned "working within the Ubuntu framework".
> 
> To summarize:  Others control which kernels are available and
> maintained in the archives and I get to select from the available
> kernels which one to include in the Ubuntu Studio ISO image.
> 
> To state what is "needed" or "required" or "worthless without" for
> multimedia production is irrelevant.  I say again, to build a Ubuntu
> Studio ISO image within the Ubuntu framework I must choose from the
> available kernels in the repositories, of which I wield extremely
> limited influence in deciding which are to be available.
> 
>  
> 
> Multimedia producer just need a kernel-rt and a package
> including the
> headers to compile e.g. drivers for graphics.
> 
> For my needs the kernel-rt doesn't provide hard enough
> real-time, but
> the kernel-rt is a compromise that might enable some audio
> productions.
> 
> You might wish to compare a C64, Atari ST or stand alone
> sequencer from
> the eighties with a kernel-rt and a kernel without rt-patch
> used by a
> good classical or jazz musician. There still is too much
> jitter, but the
> kernel-rt for sure will be the first kernel, that might be
> able to get
> the knack of it.
> 
> The kernel-rt is the best we do have for Linux, hence it's
> invalid to
> use a less good kernel, as long as even the kernel-rt isn't
> able to do
> hard real-time.
> 
> So, if there should be a rule for Ubuntu, that all patched
> kernels has
> to base on the same vanilla version, which is a good thought,
> it's not
> good for multimedia productions.
> 
> There are coders who program the rt-patch, to make Linux
> better and
> better, it's not smart if a multimedia distro tries to be
> smarter by not
> using a kernel-rt, because it shouldn't be needed.
> 
> The kernel-rt is needed and there should be no rule not to use
> it.
> 
> Btw. to make the issue harder. It's not only that there isn't
> a rt-patch
> for every vanilla kernel, sometimes a current
> rt-patch-kernel-combination can be bad, so that we need to
> keep older
> rt-patched kernels. Sometimes it's not possible to keep
> 'things' that
> are available by a generic kernel of the same vanilla version,
> when
> using the rt-patch, but there's no need to keep all kernel
> features for
> real-time audio productions.
> 
> 
> * snip *
> 
> No one is suggesting that the -rt kernel is not a good thing or that
> is not to be preferred over other kernels.  However, stating that the
> -rt kernel is needed or multimedia production is worthless without it
> is not going to change the fact that the -rt kernel will not be
> included in an Ubuntu Studio ISO image for the reasons stated above.
> 
> Furthermore, no one is stating that you should not use the -rt kernel.
> Quite the contrary, it is almost required for laptop users with
> firewire audio interfaces and we have made it very clear that we will
> make the -rt kernel available via a PPA.
> 
> Again, this is not our choice to include a kernel other than the -rt
> kernel released in Ubuntu Studio.  It is a necessity dictated by what
> 

Re: The different realtime kernels

[Scott Lavender]

On Fri, Oct 1, 2010 at 7:38 AM, Ralf Mardorf wrote:

> On Thu, 2010-09-30 at 14:10 -0500, Scott Lavender wrote:
>
> > [snip]
> > This is not a rhetorical question.  I, as Ubuntu Studio project lead,
> > would like to include it.  If you can provide a tenable method to
> > include the -rt kernel in the Ubuntu Studio ISO image I would like to
> > implement it.
> > [snip]
>
> Hi Scott :)
>
> I'm not sure, if I do understand the problem.
>
> Does Ubuntu need the same vanilla kernel version for different kind of
> kernels, e.g. to provide packages for proprietary graphic modules?
> If so, IMO it's not needed to make the multimedia distro full compatible
> with a regular Ubuntu.
>
> * snip *

I think you are missing the point.

It does not matter _why_ certain kernels are maintained and available in the
repositories.  It only matters _that_ the decision was made.

The only kernels I can include within a Ubuntu Studio ISO image are the
kernels available from the official Ubuntu archives.

Furthermore, I do not decide which kernels may be included in the archives.
That ultimate decision is made by others, although I may provide some small
influence on it.  This is an example of when I mentioned "working within the
Ubuntu framework".

To summarize:  Others control which kernels are available and maintained in
the archives and I get to select from the available kernels which one to
include in the Ubuntu Studio ISO image.

To state what is "needed" or "required" or "worthless without" for
multimedia production is irrelevant.  I say again, to build a Ubuntu Studio
ISO image within the Ubuntu framework I must choose from the available
kernels in the repositories, of which I wield extremely limited influence in
deciding which are to be available.



> Multimedia producer just need a kernel-rt and a package including the
> headers to compile e.g. drivers for graphics.
>
> For my needs the kernel-rt doesn't provide hard enough real-time, but
> the kernel-rt is a compromise that might enable some audio productions.
>
> You might wish to compare a C64, Atari ST or stand alone sequencer from
> the eighties with a kernel-rt and a kernel without rt-patch used by a
> good classical or jazz musician. There still is too much jitter, but the
> kernel-rt for sure will be the first kernel, that might be able to get
> the knack of it.
>
> The kernel-rt is the best we do have for Linux, hence it's invalid to
> use a less good kernel, as long as even the kernel-rt isn't able to do
> hard real-time.
>
> So, if there should be a rule for Ubuntu, that all patched kernels has
> to base on the same vanilla version, which is a good thought, it's not
> good for multimedia productions.
>

> There are coders who program the rt-patch, to make Linux better and
> better, it's not smart if a multimedia distro tries to be smarter by not
> using a kernel-rt, because it shouldn't be needed.
>
> The kernel-rt is needed and there should be no rule not to use it.
>
> Btw. to make the issue harder. It's not only that there isn't a rt-patch
> for every vanilla kernel, sometimes a current
> rt-patch-kernel-combination can be bad, so that we need to keep older
> rt-patched kernels. Sometimes it's not possible to keep 'things' that
> are available by a generic kernel of the same vanilla version, when
> using the rt-patch, but there's no need to keep all kernel features for
> real-time audio productions.
>
>
* snip *

No one is suggesting that the -rt kernel is not a good thing or that is not
to be preferred over other kernels.  However, stating that the -rt kernel is
needed or multimedia production is worthless without it is not going to
change the fact that the -rt kernel will not be included in an Ubuntu Studio
ISO image for the reasons stated above.

Furthermore, no one is stating that you should not use the -rt kernel.
Quite the contrary, it is almost required for laptop users with firewire
audio interfaces and we have made it very clear that we will make the -rt
kernel available via a PPA.

Again, this is not our choice to include a kernel other than the -rt kernel
released in Ubuntu Studio.  It is a necessity dictated by what is available
in the repositories.

Lastly, I am curious to which hardware you are using if you find that the
-rt kernel is not hard time enough for your needs.


The need for hard real-time is an exceptional case, not only for
> multimedia production, there are other real-time patches, e.g. for the
> Enhanced Machine Controller project.
> Some people and you might be fine with a non-real-time patched kernel,
> but most professional studios aren't even fine with the kernel-rt or on
> Windows  ASIO, resp. ASIO + Nuendo on some machines should be near to
> eighties hard real-time.
>

* snip *

I would argue that Ubuntu Studio is not for a professional studio.

Despite what others might argue or what various documentation might say, I
believe the Ubuntu Studio is NOT for professional use in a recording studio.

In my opinion, much grea

Re: The different realtime kernels

[Ralf Mardorf]

On Thu, 2010-09-30 at 14:10 -0500, Scott Lavender wrote:

> [snip]
> This is not a rhetorical question.  I, as Ubuntu Studio project lead,
> would like to include it.  If you can provide a tenable method to
> include the -rt kernel in the Ubuntu Studio ISO image I would like to
> implement it.
> [snip]

Hi Scott :)

I'm not sure, if I do understand the problem.

Does Ubuntu need the same vanilla kernel version for different kind of
kernels, e.g. to provide packages for proprietary graphic modules?
If so, IMO it's not needed to make the multimedia distro full compatible
with a regular Ubuntu.

Multimedia producer just need a kernel-rt and a package including the
headers to compile e.g. drivers for graphics.

For my needs the kernel-rt doesn't provide hard enough real-time, but
the kernel-rt is a compromise that might enable some audio productions.

You might wish to compare a C64, Atari ST or stand alone sequencer from
the eighties with a kernel-rt and a kernel without rt-patch used by a
good classical or jazz musician. There still is too much jitter, but the
kernel-rt for sure will be the first kernel, that might be able to get
the knack of it.

The kernel-rt is the best we do have for Linux, hence it's invalid to
use a less good kernel, as long as even the kernel-rt isn't able to do
hard real-time.

So, if there should be a rule for Ubuntu, that all patched kernels has
to base on the same vanilla version, which is a good thought, it's not
good for multimedia productions.

The need for hard real-time is an exceptional case, not only for
multimedia production, there are other real-time patches, e.g. for the
Enhanced Machine Controller project.
Some people and you might be fine with a non-real-time patched kernel,
but most professional studios aren't even fine with the kernel-rt or on
Windows  ASIO, resp. ASIO + Nuendo on some machines should be near to
eighties hard real-time.

There are coders who program the rt-patch, to make Linux better and
better, it's not smart if a multimedia distro tries to be smarter by not
using a kernel-rt, because it shouldn't be needed.

The kernel-rt is needed and there should be no rule not to use it.

Btw. to make the issue harder. It's not only that there isn't a rt-patch
for every vanilla kernel, sometimes a current
rt-patch-kernel-combination can be bad, so that we need to keep older
rt-patched kernels. Sometimes it's not possible to keep 'things' that
are available by a generic kernel of the same vanilla version, when
using the rt-patch, but there's no need to keep all kernel features for
real-time audio productions.

Cheers!

Ralf


-- 
Ubuntu-Studio-users mailing list
Ubuntu-Studio-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-users

Re: The different realtime kernels

[Brian David]

On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 2:13 PM, Jeremy Jongepier wrote:

> On 09/30/2010 08:40 PM, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
>
> Hello Ralf,
>
> It's not pointless.
> A lot of stuff from the patch-set has been integrated in the vanilla
> kernel already throughout the years. It is perfectly possible to run an
> audio production PC without a real-time kernel these days.
> I wouldn't need a real-time kernel if the FireWire controller in my
> notebook for instance would sit on its own IRQ. But no, it shares its
> IRQ with a dozen of other devices so I really need a real-time kernel to
> prioritize my FireWire IRQ thread. If it wasn't for that I would be
> perfectly happy with -lowlatency.
>
> Best,
>
> Jeremy
>
>
I'll second this.  I have two computers, a desktop and a laptop.  The
desktop is absolutely an excellent DAW using just the generic kernel, and
works even better with -lowlatency.  However, my laptop is basically
unusable without -rt.  The solution that Scott has suggested is perfect for
a user like me.  And, I think as long as the documentation is thorough and
easily accessible, it could work for most everyone else.

So, focusing on -lowlatency is not pointless.

-- 
-Brian David
-- 
Ubuntu-Studio-users mailing list
Ubuntu-Studio-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-users

Re: The different realtime kernels

[Jeremy Jongepier]

On 09/30/2010 08:40 PM, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> On Thu, 2010-09-30 at 13:25 -0500, Scott Lavender wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 11:44 AM, Ralf Mardorf
>>   wrote:
>>  On Thu, 2010-09-30 at 17:15 +0100, Ricardo Lameiro wrote:
>>  >  I agree with you. I think the best compromise is to use the
>>  Hard RT
>>  >  kernel patch on top of vanilla kernel, and have the Generic
>>  kernel for
>>  >  everyday usage.
>>  >  You can choose which kernel to boot from at the beginning,
>>
>>
>>  I only use vanilla + rt-patched kernels for audio-video and
>>  everyday
>>  usage. The only difference is the CPU frequency scaling. For
>>  everyday
>>  usage I set it to ondemand and for audio-video work to
>>  performance and
>>  sometimes I manually enable hr timer when doing MIDI work.
>>
>>  IMO just a kernl-rt is needed, but as I mentioned before,
>>  people running
>>  32-bit architecture might need a patch to enable usage of
>>  large RAM.
>>
>>  But indeed, GRUB is our friend, we are free to use several
>>  kernels. OT:
>>  GRUB is a little bit more user-friendly than GRUB2 is ;).
>>
>>  >  Hard RT kernel, should be the only one to be supported,
>>  since it is
>>  >  the kernel that brings more benefits to audio/video
>>  production, If we
>>  >  spread attention with 2 more kernel flavours, no one can
>>  support it,
>>  >  and lets face it, abogani makes a hell of a good job, so we
>>  should
>>  >  simplify is life :D
>>
>>
>>  Hm, on my Ubuntu Studio, neither Abogani's, anyone else or my
>>  own build
>>  kernel-rt are ok :(. I can't boot any kernel-rt.
>>
>>  I'm able to run Suse with my self build kernel-rt, but not
>>  with the
>>  repositories once and I'm able to run 64 Studio (Hardy,
>>  Karmic) with
>>  kernel-rt from the repositories and self build kernels.
>>
>>  Live CDs, e.g. AV Linux are ok with the kernel-rt.
>>
>>  Anyway, the rt-patch could be a PITA, while the PREEMPT only
>>  kernel for
>>  Ubuntu Studio is ok on my machine, as far as a PREEMPT only
>>  kernel is
>>  able to do some jobs, but I'm able to boot the kernel.
>>
>>  IMO we only should take care of the kernel-rt and no other
>>  kernel.
>>  Hard disk drives today are less expensive so everybody should
>>  be able to
>>  install a distro for audio-video usage and if needed other
>>  distros for
>>  other usages, because not only the kernel makes a different.
>>  IMO a DAW
>>  e.g. don't need the security that's needed for some other
>>  usages.
>>
>>  I'm running several Linux, no Windows, on my 2 core AMD 64-bit
>>  PC, for
>>  everyday usage and audio-MIDI productions, all Linux with
>>  kernel-rt
>>  only, excepted Ubuntu Studio, because I didn't had the time to
>>  troubleshoot why I'm unable to boot a kernel-rt for Ubuntu
>>  Studio.
>>
>>  I prefer 64 Studio, but I really like Suse and Ubuntu Studio
>>  too, of
>>  course there are some other good distros, but those three are
>>  my
>>  favourites, even if Ubuntu Studio until today isn't ready for
>>  production.
>>  I like the concept of Ubuntu Studio, excepted of the default
>>  PREEMPT
>>  kernel, without rt-patch.
>>
>>  This are just my personal 2 cents, the advantage of Linux,
>>  that we do
>>  have a lot of different paths we could go, even if it
>>  sometimes seems to
>>  be a disadvantage.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>  --
>>
>>  Ubuntu-Studio-users mailing list
>>  Ubuntu-Studio-users@lists.ubuntu.com
>>  Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
>>  https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-users
>>
>>
>> This isn't necessarily addressed to Ralf, but it ties in with the
>> comments in his email.
>>
>> Ubuntu Studio as a project makes far fewer decisions that people
>> probably expect.  The kernel is a good example.
>>
>> The Ubuntu Studio team did not decide to remove the -rt kernel from
>> the ISO image because we think it is inferior or that another kernel
>> performs better.  We would like to still be able to provide it to our
>> users because we understand that it yields performance that other
>> kernels cannot provide.  We can no longer provide the -rt kernel in
>> the ISO image because it is no longer in the official archives.
>>
>> Ubuntu Studio exists and must maneuver within Canonical/Ubuntu
>> ecosphere.  And sometimes decisions are made by Canonical or Ubuntu
>> that grossly affect Ubuntu Studio.  Some of those can be mitigated
>> (e.g

Re: The different realtime kernels

[Scott Lavender]

On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 1:40 PM, Ralf Mardorf wrote:

> On Thu, 2010-09-30 at 13:25 -0500, Scott Lavender wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 11:44 AM, Ralf Mardorf
> >  wrote:
> > On Thu, 2010-09-30 at 17:15 +0100, Ricardo Lameiro wrote:
> > > I agree with you. I think the best compromise is to use the
> > Hard RT
> > > kernel patch on top of vanilla kernel, and have the Generic
> > kernel for
> > > everyday usage.
> > > You can choose which kernel to boot from at the beginning,
> >
> >
> > I only use vanilla + rt-patched kernels for audio-video and
> > everyday
> > usage. The only difference is the CPU frequency scaling. For
> > everyday
> > usage I set it to ondemand and for audio-video work to
> > performance and
> > sometimes I manually enable hr timer when doing MIDI work.
> >
> > IMO just a kernl-rt is needed, but as I mentioned before,
> > people running
> > 32-bit architecture might need a patch to enable usage of
> > large RAM.
> >
> > But indeed, GRUB is our friend, we are free to use several
> > kernels. OT:
> > GRUB is a little bit more user-friendly than GRUB2 is ;).
> >
> > > Hard RT kernel, should be the only one to be supported,
> > since it is
> > > the kernel that brings more benefits to audio/video
> > production, If we
> > > spread attention with 2 more kernel flavours, no one can
> > support it,
> > > and lets face it, abogani makes a hell of a good job, so we
> > should
> > > simplify is life :D
> >
> >
> > Hm, on my Ubuntu Studio, neither Abogani's, anyone else or my
> > own build
> > kernel-rt are ok :(. I can't boot any kernel-rt.
> >
> > I'm able to run Suse with my self build kernel-rt, but not
> > with the
> > repositories once and I'm able to run 64 Studio (Hardy,
> > Karmic) with
> > kernel-rt from the repositories and self build kernels.
> >
> > Live CDs, e.g. AV Linux are ok with the kernel-rt.
> >
> > Anyway, the rt-patch could be a PITA, while the PREEMPT only
> > kernel for
> > Ubuntu Studio is ok on my machine, as far as a PREEMPT only
> > kernel is
> > able to do some jobs, but I'm able to boot the kernel.
> >
> > IMO we only should take care of the kernel-rt and no other
> > kernel.
> > Hard disk drives today are less expensive so everybody should
> > be able to
> > install a distro for audio-video usage and if needed other
> > distros for
> > other usages, because not only the kernel makes a different.
> > IMO a DAW
> > e.g. don't need the security that's needed for some other
> > usages.
> >
> > I'm running several Linux, no Windows, on my 2 core AMD 64-bit
> > PC, for
> > everyday usage and audio-MIDI productions, all Linux with
> > kernel-rt
> > only, excepted Ubuntu Studio, because I didn't had the time to
> > troubleshoot why I'm unable to boot a kernel-rt for Ubuntu
> > Studio.
> >
> > I prefer 64 Studio, but I really like Suse and Ubuntu Studio
> > too, of
> > course there are some other good distros, but those three are
> > my
> > favourites, even if Ubuntu Studio until today isn't ready for
> > production.
> > I like the concept of Ubuntu Studio, excepted of the default
> > PREEMPT
> > kernel, without rt-patch.
> >
> > This are just my personal 2 cents, the advantage of Linux,
> > that we do
> > have a lot of different paths we could go, even if it
> > sometimes seems to
> > be a disadvantage.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> >
> > Ubuntu-Studio-users mailing list
> > Ubuntu-Studio-users@lists.ubuntu.com
> > Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
> > https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-users
> >
> >
> > This isn't necessarily addressed to Ralf, but it ties in with the
> > comments in his email.
> >
> > Ubuntu Studio as a project makes far fewer decisions that people
> > probably expect.  The kernel is a good example.
> >
> > The Ubuntu Studio team did not decide to remove the -rt kernel from
> > the ISO image because we think it is inferior or that another kernel
> > performs better.  We would like to still be able to provide it to our
> > users because we understand that it yields performance that other
> > kernels cannot provide.  We can no longer provide the -rt kernel in
> > the ISO image because it is no longer in the official archives.
> >
> > Ubuntu Studio exists and must maneuver within Canonical/Ubuntu
> > ecosphere.  And sometimes decisions are made by Canonical or Ubuntu
> > that grossly affect Ubuntu Studio.

Re: The different realtime kernels

[Ralf Mardorf]

On Thu, 2010-09-30 at 13:25 -0500, Scott Lavender wrote:
> 
> On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 11:44 AM, Ralf Mardorf
>  wrote:
> On Thu, 2010-09-30 at 17:15 +0100, Ricardo Lameiro wrote:
> > I agree with you. I think the best compromise is to use the
> Hard RT
> > kernel patch on top of vanilla kernel, and have the Generic
> kernel for
> > everyday usage.
> > You can choose which kernel to boot from at the beginning,
> 
> 
> I only use vanilla + rt-patched kernels for audio-video and
> everyday
> usage. The only difference is the CPU frequency scaling. For
> everyday
> usage I set it to ondemand and for audio-video work to
> performance and
> sometimes I manually enable hr timer when doing MIDI work.
> 
> IMO just a kernl-rt is needed, but as I mentioned before,
> people running
> 32-bit architecture might need a patch to enable usage of
> large RAM.
> 
> But indeed, GRUB is our friend, we are free to use several
> kernels. OT:
> GRUB is a little bit more user-friendly than GRUB2 is ;).
> 
> > Hard RT kernel, should be the only one to be supported,
> since it is
> > the kernel that brings more benefits to audio/video
> production, If we
> > spread attention with 2 more kernel flavours, no one can
> support it,
> > and lets face it, abogani makes a hell of a good job, so we
> should
> > simplify is life :D
> 
> 
> Hm, on my Ubuntu Studio, neither Abogani's, anyone else or my
> own build
> kernel-rt are ok :(. I can't boot any kernel-rt.
> 
> I'm able to run Suse with my self build kernel-rt, but not
> with the
> repositories once and I'm able to run 64 Studio (Hardy,
> Karmic) with
> kernel-rt from the repositories and self build kernels.
> 
> Live CDs, e.g. AV Linux are ok with the kernel-rt.
> 
> Anyway, the rt-patch could be a PITA, while the PREEMPT only
> kernel for
> Ubuntu Studio is ok on my machine, as far as a PREEMPT only
> kernel is
> able to do some jobs, but I'm able to boot the kernel.
> 
> IMO we only should take care of the kernel-rt and no other
> kernel.
> Hard disk drives today are less expensive so everybody should
> be able to
> install a distro for audio-video usage and if needed other
> distros for
> other usages, because not only the kernel makes a different.
> IMO a DAW
> e.g. don't need the security that's needed for some other
> usages.
> 
> I'm running several Linux, no Windows, on my 2 core AMD 64-bit
> PC, for
> everyday usage and audio-MIDI productions, all Linux with
> kernel-rt
> only, excepted Ubuntu Studio, because I didn't had the time to
> troubleshoot why I'm unable to boot a kernel-rt for Ubuntu
> Studio.
> 
> I prefer 64 Studio, but I really like Suse and Ubuntu Studio
> too, of
> course there are some other good distros, but those three are
> my
> favourites, even if Ubuntu Studio until today isn't ready for
> production.
> I like the concept of Ubuntu Studio, excepted of the default
> PREEMPT
> kernel, without rt-patch.
> 
> This are just my personal 2 cents, the advantage of Linux,
> that we do
> have a lot of different paths we could go, even if it
> sometimes seems to
> be a disadvantage.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --
> 
> Ubuntu-Studio-users mailing list
> Ubuntu-Studio-users@lists.ubuntu.com
> Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-users
> 
> 
> This isn't necessarily addressed to Ralf, but it ties in with the
> comments in his email.
> 
> Ubuntu Studio as a project makes far fewer decisions that people
> probably expect.  The kernel is a good example.
> 
> The Ubuntu Studio team did not decide to remove the -rt kernel from
> the ISO image because we think it is inferior or that another kernel
> performs better.  We would like to still be able to provide it to our
> users because we understand that it yields performance that other
> kernels cannot provide.  We can no longer provide the -rt kernel in
> the ISO image because it is no longer in the official archives.
> 
> Ubuntu Studio exists and must maneuver within Canonical/Ubuntu
> ecosphere.  And sometimes decisions are made by Canonical or Ubuntu
> that grossly affect Ubuntu Studio.  Some of those can be mitigated
> (e.g. ubuntustudio-menu vs. ubuntu menu with social integration) and
> other

Re: The different realtime kernels

[Ralf Mardorf]

On Thu, 2010-09-30 at 14:08 -0400, Ronan Jouchet wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 1:53 PM, Ralf Mardorf
>  wrote:
> > Hi Ronan :)
> >
> > I marked your email and will come back to it ASAP. At the moment the
> > influenza gained the upper hand.
> >
> > I guess it's not that important what issues I had when using the PREEMPT
> > kernel, there were issues and I didn't noticed that it was a PREEMPT,
> > but a PREEMPT RT kernel, when I posted something, including uname -a at
> > LAD or JACK mailing list. Somebody else noticed it. I might do another
> > test, or search the archives, but I would prefer trying to compile and
> > build a package for a kernel-rt again on my Ubuntu Studio and post the
> > package for 64-bit or ask because of trouble, if the compiling should
> > fail, resp. the startup when booting the kernel should fail.
> >
> > Perhaps I could try to compile a kernel-rt at the weekend. I suspect
> > issues for the startup regarding to X, but I'm not sure.
> >
> > To be continued ... probably this weekend ... if I don't answer until
> > the week after next, please remember me to compile a kernel-rt and to
> > post the messages I get when booting the kernel-rt from the
> > repositories.
> >
> > Today I don't wish to test anything.
> 
> Great to read this.
> The tone of my previous email might have sounded a bit harsh but it
> definitely wasn't, I just want us to stay focused. I'm glad you took
> it well and understood my request for testing.
> I wish you a prompt recovery and hope to see the results of your tests soon!
> Good day,
> Ronan

:D

Thank you :)

don't worry, I'm nagging and I don't feel that your mail was harsh :).

We wish to have PCs able for professional audio and video usage, so we
need to be candid and straight.

We don't sell Windows ;).

Cheers!

Ralf



-- 
Ubuntu-Studio-users mailing list
Ubuntu-Studio-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-users

Re: The different realtime kernels

[Scott Lavender]

On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 11:44 AM, Ralf Mardorf
wrote:

> On Thu, 2010-09-30 at 17:15 +0100, Ricardo Lameiro wrote:
> > I agree with you. I think the best compromise is to use the Hard RT
> > kernel patch on top of vanilla kernel, and have the Generic kernel for
> > everyday usage.
> > You can choose which kernel to boot from at the beginning,
>
> I only use vanilla + rt-patched kernels for audio-video and everyday
> usage. The only difference is the CPU frequency scaling. For everyday
> usage I set it to ondemand and for audio-video work to performance and
> sometimes I manually enable hr timer when doing MIDI work.
>
> IMO just a kernl-rt is needed, but as I mentioned before, people running
> 32-bit architecture might need a patch to enable usage of large RAM.
>
> But indeed, GRUB is our friend, we are free to use several kernels. OT:
> GRUB is a little bit more user-friendly than GRUB2 is ;).
>
> > Hard RT kernel, should be the only one to be supported, since it is
> > the kernel that brings more benefits to audio/video production, If we
> > spread attention with 2 more kernel flavours, no one can support it,
> > and lets face it, abogani makes a hell of a good job, so we should
> > simplify is life :D
>
> Hm, on my Ubuntu Studio, neither Abogani's, anyone else or my own build
> kernel-rt are ok :(. I can't boot any kernel-rt.
>
> I'm able to run Suse with my self build kernel-rt, but not with the
> repositories once and I'm able to run 64 Studio (Hardy, Karmic) with
> kernel-rt from the repositories and self build kernels.
>
> Live CDs, e.g. AV Linux are ok with the kernel-rt.
>
> Anyway, the rt-patch could be a PITA, while the PREEMPT only kernel for
> Ubuntu Studio is ok on my machine, as far as a PREEMPT only kernel is
> able to do some jobs, but I'm able to boot the kernel.
>
> IMO we only should take care of the kernel-rt and no other kernel.
> Hard disk drives today are less expensive so everybody should be able to
> install a distro for audio-video usage and if needed other distros for
> other usages, because not only the kernel makes a different. IMO a DAW
> e.g. don't need the security that's needed for some other usages.
>
> I'm running several Linux, no Windows, on my 2 core AMD 64-bit PC, for
> everyday usage and audio-MIDI productions, all Linux with kernel-rt
> only, excepted Ubuntu Studio, because I didn't had the time to
> troubleshoot why I'm unable to boot a kernel-rt for Ubuntu Studio.
>
> I prefer 64 Studio, but I really like Suse and Ubuntu Studio too, of
> course there are some other good distros, but those three are my
> favourites, even if Ubuntu Studio until today isn't ready for
> production.
> I like the concept of Ubuntu Studio, excepted of the default PREEMPT
> kernel, without rt-patch.
>
> This are just my personal 2 cents, the advantage of Linux, that we do
> have a lot of different paths we could go, even if it sometimes seems to
> be a disadvantage.
>
>
> --
> Ubuntu-Studio-users mailing list
> Ubuntu-Studio-users@lists.ubuntu.com
> Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-users
>

This isn't necessarily addressed to Ralf, but it ties in with the comments
in his email.

Ubuntu Studio as a project makes far fewer decisions that people probably
expect.  The kernel is a good example.

The Ubuntu Studio team did not decide to remove the -rt kernel from the ISO
image because we think it is inferior or that another kernel performs
better.  We would like to still be able to provide it to our users because
we understand that it yields performance that other kernels cannot provide.
We can no longer provide the -rt kernel in the ISO image because it is no
longer in the official archives.

Ubuntu Studio exists and must maneuver within Canonical/Ubuntu ecosphere.
And sometimes decisions are made by Canonical or Ubuntu that grossly affect
Ubuntu Studio.  Some of those can be mitigated (e.g. ubuntustudio-menu vs.
ubuntu menu with social integration) and others cannot.

By the way, mitigating such things is a very good reason to keep building
ISOs instead of just focusing on a Ubuntu Studio PPA.

Some of the reasoning to remove the -rt kernel is because of a desire to
keep the kernel versions aligned between Ubuntu and Ubuntu Studio.  And
since the -rt patch is not available for every kernel version release, to
continuously maintain the alignment would eventually be untenable, as
witnessed with Lucid.

Therefore, Ubuntu Studio is progressing to get the -lowlatency kernel
accepted and promoted to the official archives.  This way we can offer it in
the ISO image.  This would provide a performance tuned kernel that hopefully
most of our users will find acceptable "out-of-the-box".  Since the
-lowlatency kernel results from compiling the -generic kernel with different
flags (at least my understanding of it), it can be easily and continuously
maintained in the repositories.

For those who still require an -rt kernel, we are planning to acc

Re: The different realtime kernels

[Ronan Jouchet]

On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 1:53 PM, Ralf Mardorf
 wrote:
> Hi Ronan :)
>
> I marked your email and will come back to it ASAP. At the moment the
> influenza gained the upper hand.
>
> I guess it's not that important what issues I had when using the PREEMPT
> kernel, there were issues and I didn't noticed that it was a PREEMPT,
> but a PREEMPT RT kernel, when I posted something, including uname -a at
> LAD or JACK mailing list. Somebody else noticed it. I might do another
> test, or search the archives, but I would prefer trying to compile and
> build a package for a kernel-rt again on my Ubuntu Studio and post the
> package for 64-bit or ask because of trouble, if the compiling should
> fail, resp. the startup when booting the kernel should fail.
>
> Perhaps I could try to compile a kernel-rt at the weekend. I suspect
> issues for the startup regarding to X, but I'm not sure.
>
> To be continued ... probably this weekend ... if I don't answer until
> the week after next, please remember me to compile a kernel-rt and to
> post the messages I get when booting the kernel-rt from the
> repositories.
>
> Today I don't wish to test anything.

Great to read this.
The tone of my previous email might have sounded a bit harsh but it
definitely wasn't, I just want us to stay focused. I'm glad you took
it well and understood my request for testing.
I wish you a prompt recovery and hope to see the results of your tests soon!
Good day,
Ronan

-- 
Ubuntu-Studio-users mailing list
Ubuntu-Studio-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-users

Re: The different realtime kernels

[Kenneth Koym]

Am pleased to see confidence being expressed. But I've yet for the first
time, hear sound, produce a video or hear good music from my PC using ubuStu
10.04.1 lts on my ASUS 64AMD or on my Acer Laptop via UbuStu found on it; am
having to ask others to do what geeks patiently make feasible. But a
non-geek like me wants to believe, I am ever so close to realizing. Keep up
the fight; I support you and will stick in here too believing it is okay to
use my OS solely to crunch words. Yes I hope I will be producing DVDs
showing work I and friends do instead of just wishing I/we could. Million
thanks! Just do not stop perfecting end products! Ken

On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 10:55 AM, Ralf Mardorf
wrote:

> On Thu, 2010-09-30 at 17:45 +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> > Hi Ricardo :)
> >
> > sorry for my broken English, especially at the moment, because I do have
> > an influenza.
> >
> > On Thu, 2010-09-30 at 16:18 +0100, Ricardo Lameiro wrote:
> > > Hi Ralf,
> > >
> > > I didn't understood what did you meant with:
> > > > For what do multimedia users (producers, but consumers) need more,
> > > but
> > > > vanilla + rt-patch? Does somebody run a multi-user data server on
> > > the
> > > > same machine, as he is using in his audio or audio-video studio?
> > > This
> > > > would be nonsense.
> > >
> > > What would be nonsense? audio producers using hard RT preemption on
> > > the kernel?
> > > Do you think that a webserver needs more Realtime preemption than
> > > audio work?
> >
> > No, I guess for audio and audio-video productions we only need a vanilla
> > + rt-patch kernel and nothing more.
> >
> > Nobody should run a web-server or anything else on a DAW, so there are
> > no other kernel patches needed.
> >
> > I'm pro PREEMPT RT and against PREEMPT only ;) or any kernel patches
> > that don't make sense for audio, audio-video productions.
> >
> > I was asking for reasons to patch a kernel with something like a
> > 'generic'-patch. A DAW, resp. audio-video-MIDI workstation don't need a
> > special server-kernel, or desktop-kernel etc., just a vanilla kernel +
> > rt-patch.
> >
> > Why does Ubuntu Studio comes without PREEMPT RT, but just PREEMPT?!
> > This is my intension.
> >
> > FWIW, I'm a professional audio and video engineer and did program oldish
> > computers and I'm missing hard real-time for modern PCs. Even the
> > kernel-rt isn't able to do hard real-time, so I don't understand why
> > Ubuntu Studio does prefer a kernel without rt-patch. Today the rt-patch
> > isn't good enough
>
> PS:
>
> Pardon, it isn't good enough for all needs, but good for a lot of needs,
> hence we should use the rt-patch.
>
> > and any kernel without this patch is useless for
> > multimedia production.
> >
> > So a misunderstanding ;)!
> >
> > >
> > > As I see, If a webserver used a RT kernel, it would have a lot of
> > > problems, because it will probably lock in some tasks until they are
> > > finished.
> > >
> > > Audio needs a very low latency, high resolution timer etc, because the
> > > Interrupts given by sound cards and by audio software need to be
> > > addressed as fast as possible,
> >
> > This is what I'm thinking off, I sometimes use the hr timer, that on
> > Linux still is a PITA on some machines and for some apps.
> >
> > Anyway, if possible a multimedia distro should use hr timer (HPET), but
> > always a kernel-rt only.
> >
> > >  if they arent, what happens is that the audio buffers, either for the
> > > souncard playback, or capture will run out of data, and then the
> > > continuos steam of audio data will be over, and wait until receive
> > > more info. In a Nutshell, you LOSE audio data, and you will never get
> > > it back, for professional audio that is unacceptable. Also if You give
> > > software RT priorities, it less possible that, for instance, Ardour is
> > > left behind of a twitter client unaceptable to...
> > >
> > > I am going to make some simple math with a not so professional cenario
> > > to ilstrate just the data stream, not audo software CPU time.
> > >
> > >
> > > Recording and monitoring out 8 channels (8 in 8 out) at 48KS/s at 24
> > > bits
> > >
> > > 48000 * 24 = 115200 bps = 14.0625KB/s
> > >
> > > 14.0625 * 16 = 225 KB/s = 1.76MB/s
> > >
> > > Well, 1.76 MB/s 

Re: The different realtime kernels

[Ralf Mardorf]

On Thu, 2010-09-30 at 19:53 +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> On Thu, 2010-09-30 at 12:58 -0400, Ronan Jouchet wrote:
> > On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 11:45 AM, Ralf Mardorf
> >  wrote:
> > > Why does Ubuntu Studio comes without PREEMPT RT, but just PREEMPT?!
> > > This is my intension.
> > >
> > > FWIW, I'm a professional audio and video engineer and did program oldish
> > > computers and I'm missing hard real-time for modern PCs. Even the
> > > kernel-rt isn't able to do hard real-time, so I don't understand why
> > > Ubuntu Studio does prefer a kernel without rt-patch. Today the rt-patch
> > > isn't good enough and any kernel without this patch is useless for
> > > multimedia production.
> > >
> > > So a misunderstanding ;)!
> > 
> > Hello Ralf,
> > 
> > You keep coming back to -rt/-realtime, but nobody ever questioned
> > their greatness. I trust you when you mention -rt is the ideal
> > solution in your heavy MIDI use case, and I would also *love* a
> > properly maintained -rt kernel in Studio.
> > 
> > Now, whether we want it or not, the facts are:
> > - Preparing -realtime (vanilla+rtpatch) or -rt
> > (vanilla+ubuntusauce+rtpatch) is a lot of work and there are no
> > resources for this
> > - On the contrary, -lowlatency (generic with some config tweaks) means
> > performance tradeoff, _but_ could happen in a PPA (maybe even in the
> > archives in Natty) because it is less of a maintenance hell
> > 
> > You mention you have some custom built kernels, so if you feel like
> > helping maintaining -realtime/-rt, by all means step in, talk to
> > Alessio and make it happen. But insisting again and again on -rt and
> > -realtime without considering the possibilities is only going to
> > discourage him from working on the feasible options.
> > 
> > He tries to propose sustainable options and the only echoes are
> > negative, without much questioning. What are the results of your own
> > tests with -lowlatency? What kind of performance drop have you met on
> > one of your heavy setups? How much latency lost, on which kind of
> > machine / firewire card?
> > 
> > Ronan
> 
> Hi Ronan :)
> 
> I marked your email and will come back to it ASAP. At the moment the
> influenza gained the upper hand.
> 
> I guess it's not that important what issues I had when using the PREEMPT
> kernel, there were issues and I didn't noticed that it was a PREEMPT,
> but a PREEMPT RT kernel, when I posted something, including uname -a at
> LAD or JACK mailing list. Somebody else noticed it. I might do another
> test, or search the archives, but I would prefer trying to compile and
> build a package for a kernel-rt again on my Ubuntu Studio and post the
> package for 64-bit or ask because of trouble, if the compiling should
> fail, resp. the startup when booting the kernel should fail.
> 
> Perhaps I could try to compile a kernel-rt at the weekend. I suspect
> issues for the startup regarding to X, but I'm not sure.
> 
> To be continued ... probably this weekend ... if I don't answer until
> the week after next, please remember me to compile a kernel-rt and to
> post the messages I get when booting the kernel-rt from the
> repositories.
> 
> Today I don't wish to test anything.
> 
> I've got two PCI Envy24 cards, Terratec EWX 24/96, a NVidia 7200 GS + an
> onboard Radeon X1250-based graphics. The mobo is a M2A-VM HDMI and
> 
> suse11-2:/home/spinymouse11.2 # hwinfo --cpu
> 01: None 00.0: 10103 CPU
>   [Created at cpu.301]
>   Unique ID: rdCR.j8NaKXDZtZ6
>   Hardware Class: cpu
>   Arch: X86-64
>   Vendor: "AuthenticAMD"
>   Model: 15.107.2 "AMD Athlon(tm) X2 Dual Core Processor BE-2350"
>   Features:
> fpu,vme,de,pse,tsc,msr,pae,mce,cx8,apic,sep,mtrr,pge,mca,cmov,pat,pse36,clflush,mmx,fxsr,sse,sse2,ht,syscall,nx,mmxext,fxsr_opt,rdtscp,lm,3dnowext,3dnow,rep_good,extd_apicid,pni,cx16,lahf_lm,cmp_legacy,svm,extapic,cr8_legacy,3dnowprefetch
>   Clock: 1000 MHz

Oops, clock is higher ...

spinymouse1...@suse11-2:~> cpu-p
Password: 
spinymouse1...@suse11-2:~> su -c "hwinfo --cpu"
Password: 
01: None 00.0: 10103 CPU
  [Created at cpu.301]
  Unique ID: rdCR.j8NaKXDZtZ6
  Hardware Class: cpu
  Arch: X86-64
  Vendor: "AuthenticAMD"
  Model: 15.107.2 "AMD Athlon(tm) X2 Dual Core Processor BE-2350"
  Features:
fpu,vme,de,pse,tsc,msr,pae,mce,cx8,apic,sep,mtrr,pge,mca,cmov,pat,pse36,clflush,mmx,fxsr,sse,sse2,ht,syscall,nx,mmxext,fxsr_opt,rdtscp,lm,3dnowext,3dnow,rep_good,extd_apicid,pni,cx16,lahf_lm,cmp_legacy,svm,extapic,cr8_legacy,3dnowprefetch
  Clock: 2100 MHz
[snip]

Frequency scaling was ondemand, but performance.


-- 
Ubuntu-Studio-users mailing list
Ubuntu-Studio-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-users

Re: The different realtime kernels

[Ralf Mardorf]

On Thu, 2010-09-30 at 12:58 -0400, Ronan Jouchet wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 11:45 AM, Ralf Mardorf
>  wrote:
> > Why does Ubuntu Studio comes without PREEMPT RT, but just PREEMPT?!
> > This is my intension.
> >
> > FWIW, I'm a professional audio and video engineer and did program oldish
> > computers and I'm missing hard real-time for modern PCs. Even the
> > kernel-rt isn't able to do hard real-time, so I don't understand why
> > Ubuntu Studio does prefer a kernel without rt-patch. Today the rt-patch
> > isn't good enough and any kernel without this patch is useless for
> > multimedia production.
> >
> > So a misunderstanding ;)!
> 
> Hello Ralf,
> 
> You keep coming back to -rt/-realtime, but nobody ever questioned
> their greatness. I trust you when you mention -rt is the ideal
> solution in your heavy MIDI use case, and I would also *love* a
> properly maintained -rt kernel in Studio.
> 
> Now, whether we want it or not, the facts are:
> - Preparing -realtime (vanilla+rtpatch) or -rt
> (vanilla+ubuntusauce+rtpatch) is a lot of work and there are no
> resources for this
> - On the contrary, -lowlatency (generic with some config tweaks) means
> performance tradeoff, _but_ could happen in a PPA (maybe even in the
> archives in Natty) because it is less of a maintenance hell
> 
> You mention you have some custom built kernels, so if you feel like
> helping maintaining -realtime/-rt, by all means step in, talk to
> Alessio and make it happen. But insisting again and again on -rt and
> -realtime without considering the possibilities is only going to
> discourage him from working on the feasible options.
> 
> He tries to propose sustainable options and the only echoes are
> negative, without much questioning. What are the results of your own
> tests with -lowlatency? What kind of performance drop have you met on
> one of your heavy setups? How much latency lost, on which kind of
> machine / firewire card?
> 
> Ronan

Hi Ronan :)

I marked your email and will come back to it ASAP. At the moment the
influenza gained the upper hand.

I guess it's not that important what issues I had when using the PREEMPT
kernel, there were issues and I didn't noticed that it was a PREEMPT,
but a PREEMPT RT kernel, when I posted something, including uname -a at
LAD or JACK mailing list. Somebody else noticed it. I might do another
test, or search the archives, but I would prefer trying to compile and
build a package for a kernel-rt again on my Ubuntu Studio and post the
package for 64-bit or ask because of trouble, if the compiling should
fail, resp. the startup when booting the kernel should fail.

Perhaps I could try to compile a kernel-rt at the weekend. I suspect
issues for the startup regarding to X, but I'm not sure.

To be continued ... probably this weekend ... if I don't answer until
the week after next, please remember me to compile a kernel-rt and to
post the messages I get when booting the kernel-rt from the
repositories.

Today I don't wish to test anything.

I've got two PCI Envy24 cards, Terratec EWX 24/96, a NVidia 7200 GS + an
onboard Radeon X1250-based graphics. The mobo is a M2A-VM HDMI and

suse11-2:/home/spinymouse11.2 # hwinfo --cpu
01: None 00.0: 10103 CPU
  [Created at cpu.301]
  Unique ID: rdCR.j8NaKXDZtZ6
  Hardware Class: cpu
  Arch: X86-64
  Vendor: "AuthenticAMD"
  Model: 15.107.2 "AMD Athlon(tm) X2 Dual Core Processor BE-2350"
  Features:
fpu,vme,de,pse,tsc,msr,pae,mce,cx8,apic,sep,mtrr,pge,mca,cmov,pat,pse36,clflush,mmx,fxsr,sse,sse2,ht,syscall,nx,mmxext,fxsr_opt,rdtscp,lm,3dnowext,3dnow,rep_good,extd_apicid,pni,cx16,lahf_lm,cmp_legacy,svm,extapic,cr8_legacy,3dnowprefetch
  Clock: 1000 MHz
  BogoMips: 1999.85
  Cache: 512 kb
  Units/Processor: 2
  Config Status: cfg=new, avail=yes, need=no, active=unknown

02: None 01.0: 10103 CPU
  [Created at cpu.301]
  Unique ID: wkFv.j8NaKXDZtZ6
  Hardware Class: cpu
  Arch: X86-64
  Vendor: "AuthenticAMD"
  Model: 15.107.2 "AMD Athlon(tm) X2 Dual Core Processor BE-2350"
  Features:
fpu,vme,de,pse,tsc,msr,pae,mce,cx8,apic,sep,mtrr,pge,mca,cmov,pat,pse36,clflush,mmx,fxsr,sse,sse2,ht,syscall,nx,mmxext,fxsr_opt,rdtscp,lm,3dnowext,3dnow,rep_good,extd_apicid,pni,cx16,lahf_lm,cmp_legacy,svm,extapic,cr8_legacy,3dnowprefetch
  Clock: 1000 MHz
  BogoMips: 1999.85
  Cache: 512 kb
  Units/Processor: 2
  Config Status: cfg=new, avail=yes, need=no, active=unknown
suse11-2:/home/spinymouse11.2 # hwinfo --memory
01: None 00.0: 10102 Main Memory
  [Created at memory.61]
  Unique ID: rdCR.CxwsZFjVASF
  Hardware Class: memory
  Model: "Main Memory"
  Memory Range: 0x-0x7fed (rw)
  Memory Size: 2 GB
  Config Status: cfg=new, ava

Re: The different realtime kernels

[Ronan Jouchet]

On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 11:45 AM, Ralf Mardorf
 wrote:
> Why does Ubuntu Studio comes without PREEMPT RT, but just PREEMPT?!
> This is my intension.
>
> FWIW, I'm a professional audio and video engineer and did program oldish
> computers and I'm missing hard real-time for modern PCs. Even the
> kernel-rt isn't able to do hard real-time, so I don't understand why
> Ubuntu Studio does prefer a kernel without rt-patch. Today the rt-patch
> isn't good enough and any kernel without this patch is useless for
> multimedia production.
>
> So a misunderstanding ;)!

Hello Ralf,

You keep coming back to -rt/-realtime, but nobody ever questioned
their greatness. I trust you when you mention -rt is the ideal
solution in your heavy MIDI use case, and I would also *love* a
properly maintained -rt kernel in Studio.

Now, whether we want it or not, the facts are:
- Preparing -realtime (vanilla+rtpatch) or -rt
(vanilla+ubuntusauce+rtpatch) is a lot of work and there are no
resources for this
- On the contrary, -lowlatency (generic with some config tweaks) means
performance tradeoff, _but_ could happen in a PPA (maybe even in the
archives in Natty) because it is less of a maintenance hell

You mention you have some custom built kernels, so if you feel like
helping maintaining -realtime/-rt, by all means step in, talk to
Alessio and make it happen. But insisting again and again on -rt and
-realtime without considering the possibilities is only going to
discourage him from working on the feasible options.

He tries to propose sustainable options and the only echoes are
negative, without much questioning. What are the results of your own
tests with -lowlatency? What kind of performance drop have you met on
one of your heavy setups? How much latency lost, on which kind of
machine / firewire card?

Ronan

-- 
Ubuntu-Studio-users mailing list
Ubuntu-Studio-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-users

Re: The different realtime kernels

[Ralf Mardorf]

On Thu, 2010-09-30 at 17:15 +0100, Ricardo Lameiro wrote:
> I agree with you. I think the best compromise is to use the Hard RT
> kernel patch on top of vanilla kernel, and have the Generic kernel for
> everyday usage.
> You can choose which kernel to boot from at the beginning,

I only use vanilla + rt-patched kernels for audio-video and everyday
usage. The only difference is the CPU frequency scaling. For everyday
usage I set it to ondemand and for audio-video work to performance and
sometimes I manually enable hr timer when doing MIDI work.

IMO just a kernl-rt is needed, but as I mentioned before, people running
32-bit architecture might need a patch to enable usage of large RAM.

But indeed, GRUB is our friend, we are free to use several kernels. OT:
GRUB is a little bit more user-friendly than GRUB2 is ;).

> Hard RT kernel, should be the only one to be supported, since it is
> the kernel that brings more benefits to audio/video production, If we
> spread attention with 2 more kernel flavours, no one can support it,
> and lets face it, abogani makes a hell of a good job, so we should
> simplify is life :D

Hm, on my Ubuntu Studio, neither Abogani's, anyone else or my own build
kernel-rt are ok :(. I can't boot any kernel-rt.

I'm able to run Suse with my self build kernel-rt, but not with the
repositories once and I'm able to run 64 Studio (Hardy, Karmic) with
kernel-rt from the repositories and self build kernels.

Live CDs, e.g. AV Linux are ok with the kernel-rt.

Anyway, the rt-patch could be a PITA, while the PREEMPT only kernel for
Ubuntu Studio is ok on my machine, as far as a PREEMPT only kernel is
able to do some jobs, but I'm able to boot the kernel.

IMO we only should take care of the kernel-rt and no other kernel.
Hard disk drives today are less expensive so everybody should be able to
install a distro for audio-video usage and if needed other distros for
other usages, because not only the kernel makes a different. IMO a DAW
e.g. don't need the security that's needed for some other usages.

I'm running several Linux, no Windows, on my 2 core AMD 64-bit PC, for
everyday usage and audio-MIDI productions, all Linux with kernel-rt
only, excepted Ubuntu Studio, because I didn't had the time to
troubleshoot why I'm unable to boot a kernel-rt for Ubuntu Studio.

I prefer 64 Studio, but I really like Suse and Ubuntu Studio too, of
course there are some other good distros, but those three are my
favourites, even if Ubuntu Studio until today isn't ready for
production.
I like the concept of Ubuntu Studio, excepted of the default PREEMPT
kernel, without rt-patch.

This are just my personal 2 cents, the advantage of Linux, that we do
have a lot of different paths we could go, even if it sometimes seems to
be a disadvantage.

> 
> Hard RT  kernel (Ingo Molnar Patch) and an alternative (generic) for
> everyday usage if wanted. 
> 
> I reinforce the idea, that maintaining 3 different kernels is a very
> difficult task to acomplish, and more with the scarce resources
> available (humman and finacial) let alone the spinout distros that are
> popping out on top of the project
> 
> 2010/9/30 Ralf Mardorf 
> 
> On Thu, 2010-09-30 at 17:45 +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> > Hi Ricardo :)
> >
> > sorry for my broken English, especially at the moment,
> because I do have
> > an influenza.
> >
> > On Thu, 2010-09-30 at 16:18 +0100, Ricardo Lameiro wrote:
> > > Hi Ralf,
> > >
> > > I didn't understood what did you meant with:
> > > > For what do multimedia users (producers, but consumers)
> need more,
> > > but
> > > > vanilla + rt-patch? Does somebody run a multi-user data
> server on
> > > the
> > > > same machine, as he is using in his audio or audio-video
>     studio?
> > > This
> > > > would be nonsense.
> > >
> > > What would be nonsense? audio producers using hard RT
> preemption on
> > > the kernel?
> > > Do you think that a webserver needs more Realtime
> preemption than
> > > audio work?
> >
> > No, I guess for audio and audio-video productions we only
> need a vanilla
> > + rt-patch kernel and nothing more.
> >
> > Nobody should run a web-server or anything else on a DAW, so
> there are
> > no other kernel patches needed.
> >
> > I'm pro PREEMPT RT and against PREEMPT only ;) or any kernel
>   

Re: The different realtime kernels

[Ricardo Lameiro]

I agree with you. I think the best compromise is to use the Hard RT kernel
patch on top of vanilla kernel, and have the Generic kernel for everyday
usage.
You can choose which kernel to boot from at the beginning,

Hard RT kernel, should be the only one to be supported, since it is the
kernel that brings more benefits to audio/video production, If we spread
attention with 2 more kernel flavours, no one can support it, and lets face
it, abogani makes a hell of a good job, so we should simplify is life :D

Hard RT  kernel (Ingo Molnar Patch) and an alternative (generic) for
everyday usage if wanted.

I reinforce the idea, that maintaining 3 different kernels is a very
difficult task to acomplish, and more with the scarce resources available
(humman and finacial) let alone the spinout distros that are popping out on
top of the project

2010/9/30 Ralf Mardorf 

> On Thu, 2010-09-30 at 17:45 +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> > Hi Ricardo :)
> >
> > sorry for my broken English, especially at the moment, because I do have
> > an influenza.
> >
> > On Thu, 2010-09-30 at 16:18 +0100, Ricardo Lameiro wrote:
> > > Hi Ralf,
> > >
> > > I didn't understood what did you meant with:
> > > > For what do multimedia users (producers, but consumers) need more,
> > > but
> > > > vanilla + rt-patch? Does somebody run a multi-user data server on
> > > the
> > > > same machine, as he is using in his audio or audio-video studio?
> > > This
> > > > would be nonsense.
> > >
> > > What would be nonsense? audio producers using hard RT preemption on
> > > the kernel?
> > > Do you think that a webserver needs more Realtime preemption than
> > > audio work?
> >
> > No, I guess for audio and audio-video productions we only need a vanilla
> > + rt-patch kernel and nothing more.
> >
> > Nobody should run a web-server or anything else on a DAW, so there are
> > no other kernel patches needed.
> >
> > I'm pro PREEMPT RT and against PREEMPT only ;) or any kernel patches
> > that don't make sense for audio, audio-video productions.
> >
> > I was asking for reasons to patch a kernel with something like a
> > 'generic'-patch. A DAW, resp. audio-video-MIDI workstation don't need a
> > special server-kernel, or desktop-kernel etc., just a vanilla kernel +
> > rt-patch.
> >
> > Why does Ubuntu Studio comes without PREEMPT RT, but just PREEMPT?!
> > This is my intension.
> >
> > FWIW, I'm a professional audio and video engineer and did program oldish
> > computers and I'm missing hard real-time for modern PCs. Even the
> > kernel-rt isn't able to do hard real-time, so I don't understand why
> > Ubuntu Studio does prefer a kernel without rt-patch. Today the rt-patch
> > isn't good enough
>
> PS:
>
> Pardon, it isn't good enough for all needs, but good for a lot of needs,
> hence we should use the rt-patch.
>
> > and any kernel without this patch is useless for
> > multimedia production.
> >
> > So a misunderstanding ;)!
> >
> > >
> > > As I see, If a webserver used a RT kernel, it would have a lot of
> > > problems, because it will probably lock in some tasks until they are
> > > finished.
> > >
> > > Audio needs a very low latency, high resolution timer etc, because the
> > > Interrupts given by sound cards and by audio software need to be
> > > addressed as fast as possible,
> >
> > This is what I'm thinking off, I sometimes use the hr timer, that on
> > Linux still is a PITA on some machines and for some apps.
> >
> > Anyway, if possible a multimedia distro should use hr timer (HPET), but
> > always a kernel-rt only.
> >
> > >  if they arent, what happens is that the audio buffers, either for the
> > > souncard playback, or capture will run out of data, and then the
> > > continuos steam of audio data will be over, and wait until receive
> > > more info. In a Nutshell, you LOSE audio data, and you will never get
> > > it back, for professional audio that is unacceptable. Also if You give
> > > software RT priorities, it less possible that, for instance, Ardour is
> > > left behind of a twitter client unaceptable to...
> > >
> > > I am going to make some simple math with a not so professional cenario
> > > to ilstrate just the data stream, not audo software CPU time.
> > >
> > >
> > > Recording and monitoring out 8 channels (8 in 8 out) at 48KS/s at 24
> > > bits
> > >
&g

Re: The different realtime kernels

[Ralf Mardorf]

On Thu, 2010-09-30 at 17:45 +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> Hi Ricardo :)
> 
> sorry for my broken English, especially at the moment, because I do have
> an influenza.
> 
> On Thu, 2010-09-30 at 16:18 +0100, Ricardo Lameiro wrote:
> > Hi Ralf, 
> > 
> > I didn't understood what did you meant with:
> > > For what do multimedia users (producers, but consumers) need more,
> > but
> > > vanilla + rt-patch? Does somebody run a multi-user data server on
> > the
> > > same machine, as he is using in his audio or audio-video studio?
> > This
> > > would be nonsense.
> > 
> > What would be nonsense? audio producers using hard RT preemption on
> > the kernel?
> > Do you think that a webserver needs more Realtime preemption than
> > audio work?
> 
> No, I guess for audio and audio-video productions we only need a vanilla
> + rt-patch kernel and nothing more.
> 
> Nobody should run a web-server or anything else on a DAW, so there are
> no other kernel patches needed.
> 
> I'm pro PREEMPT RT and against PREEMPT only ;) or any kernel patches
> that don't make sense for audio, audio-video productions.
> 
> I was asking for reasons to patch a kernel with something like a
> 'generic'-patch. A DAW, resp. audio-video-MIDI workstation don't need a
> special server-kernel, or desktop-kernel etc., just a vanilla kernel +
> rt-patch.
> 
> Why does Ubuntu Studio comes without PREEMPT RT, but just PREEMPT?!
> This is my intension.
> 
> FWIW, I'm a professional audio and video engineer and did program oldish
> computers and I'm missing hard real-time for modern PCs. Even the
> kernel-rt isn't able to do hard real-time, so I don't understand why
> Ubuntu Studio does prefer a kernel without rt-patch. Today the rt-patch
> isn't good enough

PS:

Pardon, it isn't good enough for all needs, but good for a lot of needs,
hence we should use the rt-patch.

> and any kernel without this patch is useless for
> multimedia production.
> 
> So a misunderstanding ;)!
> 
> > 
> > As I see, If a webserver used a RT kernel, it would have a lot of
> > problems, because it will probably lock in some tasks until they are
> > finished.
> > 
> > Audio needs a very low latency, high resolution timer etc, because the
> > Interrupts given by sound cards and by audio software need to be
> > addressed as fast as possible,
> 
> This is what I'm thinking off, I sometimes use the hr timer, that on
> Linux still is a PITA on some machines and for some apps.
> 
> Anyway, if possible a multimedia distro should use hr timer (HPET), but
> always a kernel-rt only.
> 
> >  if they arent, what happens is that the audio buffers, either for the
> > souncard playback, or capture will run out of data, and then the
> > continuos steam of audio data will be over, and wait until receive
> > more info. In a Nutshell, you LOSE audio data, and you will never get
> > it back, for professional audio that is unacceptable. Also if You give
> > software RT priorities, it less possible that, for instance, Ardour is
> > left behind of a twitter client unaceptable to...
> > 
> > I am going to make some simple math with a not so professional cenario
> > to ilstrate just the data stream, not audo software CPU time.
> > 
> > 
> > Recording and monitoring out 8 channels (8 in 8 out) at 48KS/s at 24
> > bits
> > 
> > 48000 * 24 = 115200 bps = 14.0625KB/s
> > 
> > 14.0625 * 16 = 225 KB/s = 1.76MB/s
> > 
> > Well, 1.76 MB/s is not to much really, well this calc is simple
> > cenario, provided that the sound card uses real 24 bit audio data
> > stream, if it used 32 bit, welll do the math.
> > 
> > Now to a PRO setup.. 192 KS/s @ 24bits
> > 
> > 192000 * 24 = 4608000 = 0.55 MB/s
> > 
> > 0.55 * 16  = 8,78 MB/s
> > 
> > 8.78 MBytes per second, not mbits, FIrewire is rated at 400 MBit per
> > second... USB in practice is a lot less + Communication overhead.
> > 
> > This is only on the Audio tranfer side, then you need to send this
> > streams from each different software, make dsp calculations for
> > Amplitude (volume) or mixing. This takes time so YES a Real time
> > kernels is better for audio users than for normal users. Specially if
> > you use Externals Firewire/USB card with high outputs
> > 
> > note: this are simple calculations made fast, just to demonstrate the
> > kind of stream we talk about. I assumed 24 bits, this is very rare,
> > usually it goes with 32 bit, that is a lot more data to t

Re: The different realtime kernels

[Ralf Mardorf]

Hi Ricardo :)

sorry for my broken English, especially at the moment, because I do have
an influenza.

On Thu, 2010-09-30 at 16:18 +0100, Ricardo Lameiro wrote:
> Hi Ralf, 
> 
> I didn't understood what did you meant with:
> > For what do multimedia users (producers, but consumers) need more,
> but
> > vanilla + rt-patch? Does somebody run a multi-user data server on
> the
> > same machine, as he is using in his audio or audio-video studio?
> This
> > would be nonsense.
> 
> What would be nonsense? audio producers using hard RT preemption on
> the kernel?
> Do you think that a webserver needs more Realtime preemption than
> audio work?

No, I guess for audio and audio-video productions we only need a vanilla
+ rt-patch kernel and nothing more.

Nobody should run a web-server or anything else on a DAW, so there are
no other kernel patches needed.

I'm pro PREEMPT RT and against PREEMPT only ;) or any kernel patches
that don't make sense for audio, audio-video productions.

I was asking for reasons to patch a kernel with something like a
'generic'-patch. A DAW, resp. audio-video-MIDI workstation don't need a
special server-kernel, or desktop-kernel etc., just a vanilla kernel +
rt-patch.

Why does Ubuntu Studio comes without PREEMPT RT, but just PREEMPT?!
This is my intension.

FWIW, I'm a professional audio and video engineer and did program oldish
computers and I'm missing hard real-time for modern PCs. Even the
kernel-rt isn't able to do hard real-time, so I don't understand why
Ubuntu Studio does prefer a kernel without rt-patch. Today the rt-patch
isn't good enough and any kernel without this patch is useless for
multimedia production.

So a misunderstanding ;)!

> 
> As I see, If a webserver used a RT kernel, it would have a lot of
> problems, because it will probably lock in some tasks until they are
> finished.
> 
> Audio needs a very low latency, high resolution timer etc, because the
> Interrupts given by sound cards and by audio software need to be
> addressed as fast as possible,

This is what I'm thinking off, I sometimes use the hr timer, that on
Linux still is a PITA on some machines and for some apps.

Anyway, if possible a multimedia distro should use hr timer (HPET), but
always a kernel-rt only.

>  if they arent, what happens is that the audio buffers, either for the
> souncard playback, or capture will run out of data, and then the
> continuos steam of audio data will be over, and wait until receive
> more info. In a Nutshell, you LOSE audio data, and you will never get
> it back, for professional audio that is unacceptable. Also if You give
> software RT priorities, it less possible that, for instance, Ardour is
> left behind of a twitter client unaceptable to...
> 
> I am going to make some simple math with a not so professional cenario
> to ilstrate just the data stream, not audo software CPU time.
> 
> 
> Recording and monitoring out 8 channels (8 in 8 out) at 48KS/s at 24
> bits
> 
> 48000 * 24 = 115200 bps = 14.0625KB/s
> 
> 14.0625 * 16 = 225 KB/s = 1.76MB/s
> 
> Well, 1.76 MB/s is not to much really, well this calc is simple
> cenario, provided that the sound card uses real 24 bit audio data
> stream, if it used 32 bit, welll do the math.
> 
> Now to a PRO setup.. 192 KS/s @ 24bits
> 
> 192000 * 24 = 4608000 = 0.55 MB/s
> 
> 0.55 * 16  = 8,78 MB/s
> 
> 8.78 MBytes per second, not mbits, FIrewire is rated at 400 MBit per
> second... USB in practice is a lot less + Communication overhead.
> 
> This is only on the Audio tranfer side, then you need to send this
> streams from each different software, make dsp calculations for
> Amplitude (volume) or mixing. This takes time so YES a Real time
> kernels is better for audio users than for normal users. Specially if
> you use Externals Firewire/USB card with high outputs
> 
> note: this are simple calculations made fast, just to demonstrate the
> kind of stream we talk about. I assumed 24 bits, this is very rare,
> usually it goes with 32 bit, that is a lot more data to transfer.
> 
> If some more explanation on why a RT kernel is prefered for audio, i
> can try to answer some more questions, i am not a pro in this tough.
> 
> Ricardo Lameiro
> 
> 2010/9/30 Ralf Mardorf 
> 
> On Thu, 2010-09-30 at 16:38 +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> > On Thu, 2010-09-30 at 07:35 -0400, Ronan Jouchet wrote:
> > > Hello everybody,
> > >
> > > Many are confused about the various realtime kernels, so
> here is a
> > > reminder of the situation as of Sept. 2010 (but _please_
> see
> > >
> https://help.ubuntu.com/communit

Re: The different realtime kernels

[Ricardo Lameiro]

Hi Ralf,

I didn't understood what did you meant with:
> For what do multimedia users (producers, but consumers) need more, but
> vanilla + rt-patch? Does somebody run a multi-user data server on the
> same machine, as he is using in his audio or audio-video studio? This
> would be nonsense.

What would be nonsense? audio producers using hard RT preemption on the
kernel?
Do you think that a webserver needs more Realtime preemption than audio
work?

As I see, If a webserver used a RT kernel, it would have a lot of problems,
because it will probably lock in some tasks until they are finished.

Audio needs a very low latency, high resolution timer etc, because the
Interrupts given by sound cards and by audio software need to be addressed
as fast as possible, if they arent, what happens is that the audio buffers,
either for the souncard playback, or capture will run out of data, and then
the continuos steam of audio data will be over, and wait until receive more
info. In a Nutshell, you LOSE audio data, and you will never get it back,
for professional audio that is unacceptable. Also if You give software RT
priorities, it less possible that, for instance, Ardour is left behind of a
twitter client unaceptable to...

I am going to make some simple math with a not so professional cenario to
ilstrate just the data stream, not audo software CPU time.


Recording and monitoring out 8 channels (8 in 8 out) at 48KS/s at 24 bits

48000 * 24 = 115200 bps = 14.0625KB/s

14.0625 * 16 = 225 KB/s = 1.76MB/s

Well, 1.76 MB/s is not to much really, well this calc is simple cenario,
provided that the sound card uses real 24 bit audio data stream, if it used
32 bit, welll do the math.

Now to a PRO setup.. 192 KS/s @ 24bits

192000 * 24 = 4608000 = 0.55 MB/s

0.55 * 16  = 8,78 MB/s

8.78 MBytes per second, not mbits, FIrewire is rated at 400 MBit per
second... USB in practice is a lot less + Communication overhead.

This is only on the Audio tranfer side, then you need to send this streams
from each different software, make dsp calculations for Amplitude (volume)
or mixing. This takes time so YES a Real time kernels is better for
audio users than for normal users. Specially if you use Externals
Firewire/USB card with high outputs

note: this are simple calculations made fast, just to demonstrate the kind
of stream we talk about. I assumed 24 bits, this is very rare, usually it
goes with 32 bit, that is a lot more data to transfer.

If some more explanation on why a RT kernel is prefered for audio, i can try
to answer some more questions, i am not a pro in this tough.

Ricardo Lameiro

2010/9/30 Ralf Mardorf 

> On Thu, 2010-09-30 at 16:38 +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> > On Thu, 2010-09-30 at 07:35 -0400, Ronan Jouchet wrote:
> > > Hello everybody,
> > >
> > > Many are confused about the various realtime kernels, so here is a
> > > reminder of the situation as of Sept. 2010 (but _please_ see
> > > https://help.ubuntu.com/community/UbuntuStudio/RealTimeKernel , which
> is
> > > more detailed and continuously updated).
> > >
> > > ***Summary***
> > > vanilla = unpatched kernel straight from kernel.org
> > > generic = vanilla + ubuntu sauce (it's the default ubuntu kernel)
> > >
> > > The *soft realtime kernels, prepared by changing build-time parameters*
> > >  preempt = generic + mild configuration to reduce latency
> > >  lowlatency = generic + aggressive configuration to reduce latency
> > >
> > > The *hard realtime kernels, prepared by applying a big patch* from Ingo
> > > Molnar to the kernel source before building:
> > >  realtime = vanilla + patch (hard to maintain and stabilize because
> > > merging 2 pieces of code is never easy)
> > >  rt = generic + patch (even harder to maintain and stabilize
> because
> > > merging 3 pieces of code is harder than 2)
> > >
> > > ***Availability***
> > > - for Maverick, generic will be the only kernel in the archives, thus
> > > the default kernel for ubuntu and ubuntustudio, but Alessio has been
> > > maintaining a PPA providing lowlatency and realtime
> > > - for Natty or later: work is being done to include lowlatency in the
> > > official archives and make it the default ubuntustudio kernel
> > >
> > > I hope this clears some doubts. By the way, this confusion is only
> going
> > > to get more intense at release time (less informed / technical users).
> > > Could we include some kind of note informing users about this? Why not
> a
> > > "RealTime kernel help" item in the Audio Production menu, redirecting
> to
> > > the wiki page?
> > >
> > > Good day,
> > >
> > > 

Re: The different realtime kernels

[Ralf Mardorf]

On Thu, 2010-09-30 at 16:38 +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> On Thu, 2010-09-30 at 07:35 -0400, Ronan Jouchet wrote:
> > Hello everybody,
> > 
> > Many are confused about the various realtime kernels, so here is a 
> > reminder of the situation as of Sept. 2010 (but _please_ see 
> > https://help.ubuntu.com/community/UbuntuStudio/RealTimeKernel , which is 
> > more detailed and continuously updated).
> > 
> > ***Summary***
> > vanilla = unpatched kernel straight from kernel.org
> > generic = vanilla + ubuntu sauce (it's the default ubuntu kernel)
> > 
> > The *soft realtime kernels, prepared by changing build-time parameters*
> >  preempt = generic + mild configuration to reduce latency
> >  lowlatency = generic + aggressive configuration to reduce latency
> > 
> > The *hard realtime kernels, prepared by applying a big patch* from Ingo 
> > Molnar to the kernel source before building:
> >  realtime = vanilla + patch (hard to maintain and stabilize because 
> > merging 2 pieces of code is never easy)
> >  rt = generic + patch (even harder to maintain and stabilize because 
> > merging 3 pieces of code is harder than 2)
> > 
> > ***Availability***
> > - for Maverick, generic will be the only kernel in the archives, thus 
> > the default kernel for ubuntu and ubuntustudio, but Alessio has been 
> > maintaining a PPA providing lowlatency and realtime
> > - for Natty or later: work is being done to include lowlatency in the 
> > official archives and make it the default ubuntustudio kernel
> > 
> > I hope this clears some doubts. By the way, this confusion is only going 
> > to get more intense at release time (less informed / technical users). 
> > Could we include some kind of note informing users about this? Why not a 
> > "RealTime kernel help" item in the Audio Production menu, redirecting to 
> > the wiki page?
> > 
> > Good day,
> > 
> > -- Ronan Jouchet
> 
> For what do multimedia users (producers, but consumers) need more, but
> vanilla + rt-patch? Does somebody run a multi-user data server on the
> same machine, as he is using in his audio or audio-video studio? This
> would be nonsense.
> 
> 2 cents,
> Ralf

PS: Ok, on 32-bit architecture some might need support for large RAM in
addition, this might be an additional patch, hat's not needed on 64-bit
architecture.


-- 
Ubuntu-Studio-users mailing list
Ubuntu-Studio-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-users

Re: The different realtime kernels

[Ralf Mardorf]

On Thu, 2010-09-30 at 07:35 -0400, Ronan Jouchet wrote:
> Hello everybody,
> 
> Many are confused about the various realtime kernels, so here is a 
> reminder of the situation as of Sept. 2010 (but _please_ see 
> https://help.ubuntu.com/community/UbuntuStudio/RealTimeKernel , which is 
> more detailed and continuously updated).
> 
> ***Summary***
> vanilla = unpatched kernel straight from kernel.org
> generic = vanilla + ubuntu sauce (it's the default ubuntu kernel)
> 
> The *soft realtime kernels, prepared by changing build-time parameters*
>  preempt = generic + mild configuration to reduce latency
>  lowlatency = generic + aggressive configuration to reduce latency
> 
> The *hard realtime kernels, prepared by applying a big patch* from Ingo 
> Molnar to the kernel source before building:
>  realtime = vanilla + patch (hard to maintain and stabilize because 
> merging 2 pieces of code is never easy)
>  rt = generic + patch (even harder to maintain and stabilize because 
> merging 3 pieces of code is harder than 2)
> 
> ***Availability***
> - for Maverick, generic will be the only kernel in the archives, thus 
> the default kernel for ubuntu and ubuntustudio, but Alessio has been 
> maintaining a PPA providing lowlatency and realtime
> - for Natty or later: work is being done to include lowlatency in the 
> official archives and make it the default ubuntustudio kernel
> 
> I hope this clears some doubts. By the way, this confusion is only going 
> to get more intense at release time (less informed / technical users). 
> Could we include some kind of note informing users about this? Why not a 
> "RealTime kernel help" item in the Audio Production menu, redirecting to 
> the wiki page?
> 
> Good day,
> 
> -- Ronan Jouchet

For what do multimedia users (producers, but consumers) need more, but
vanilla + rt-patch? Does somebody run a multi-user data server on the
same machine, as he is using in his audio or audio-video studio? This
would be nonsense.

2 cents,
Ralf


-- 
Ubuntu-Studio-users mailing list
Ubuntu-Studio-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-users

The different realtime kernels

[Ronan Jouchet]

Hello everybody,

Many are confused about the various realtime kernels, so here is a 
reminder of the situation as of Sept. 2010 (but _please_ see 
https://help.ubuntu.com/community/UbuntuStudio/RealTimeKernel , which is 
more detailed and continuously updated).

***Summary***
vanilla = unpatched kernel straight from kernel.org
generic = vanilla + ubuntu sauce (it's the default ubuntu kernel)

The *soft realtime kernels, prepared by changing build-time parameters*
 preempt = generic + mild configuration to reduce latency
 lowlatency = generic + aggressive configuration to reduce latency

The *hard realtime kernels, prepared by applying a big patch* from Ingo 
Molnar to the kernel source before building:
 realtime = vanilla + patch (hard to maintain and stabilize because 
merging 2 pieces of code is never easy)
 rt = generic + patch (even harder to maintain and stabilize because 
merging 3 pieces of code is harder than 2)

***Availability***
- for Maverick, generic will be the only kernel in the archives, thus 
the default kernel for ubuntu and ubuntustudio, but Alessio has been 
maintaining a PPA providing lowlatency and realtime
- for Natty or later: work is being done to include lowlatency in the 
official archives and make it the default ubuntustudio kernel

I hope this clears some doubts. By the way, this confusion is only going 
to get more intense at release time (less informed / technical users). 
Could we include some kind of note informing users about this? Why not a 
"RealTime kernel help" item in the Audio Production menu, redirecting to 
the wiki page?

Good day,

-- Ronan Jouchet

-- 
Ubuntu-Studio-users mailing list
Ubuntu-Studio-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-users

Re: what realtime patch does ubunto studio use?

[Gustin Johnson]

Eric Hedekar wrote:
> 
> 
> On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 2:46 PM, Eduardo Montoya  <mailto:hm14...@hotmail.com>> wrote:
> 
> Hello everyone,
> 
> My name is Eduardo and this is my first message in this mailing list.
> 
> I have recently downloaded the last ubuntu studio distro and i have
> installed it in my new ASUS PRO58V laptop.
> I use it mostly for music but since I am as well a programmer I
> wanted to do some experiments with the realtime programming.
> 
> I would like to know if it is using RTAI or RTLINUX.
> 
> 
> I'm not an expert in this (maybe some experts will correct any wrong
> info I give), but I don't think it's either of those but rather
> CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT as described here:
> http://rt.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/Main_Page
> 
This is the correct place to go for more info on RT and Linux (like a
how-to for writing RT applications).

The actual patch can be found here:
http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/projects/rt/



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
-- 
Ubuntu-Studio-users mailing list
Ubuntu-Studio-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-users

Re: what realtime patch does ubunto studio use?

[Eric Hedekar]

On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 2:46 PM, Eduardo Montoya wrote:

>  Hello everyone,
>
> My name is Eduardo and this is my first message in this mailing list.
>
> I have recently downloaded the last ubuntu studio distro and i have
> installed it in my new ASUS PRO58V laptop.
> I use it mostly for music but since I am as well a programmer I wanted to
> do some experiments with the realtime programming.
>
> I would like to know if it is using RTAI or RTLINUX.
>
>
I'm not an expert in this (maybe some experts will correct any wrong info I
give), but I don't think it's either of those but rather CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT
as described here: http://rt.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/Main_Page

-Eric Hedekar


-- 
___
http://greyrockstudio.blogspot.com
-- 
Ubuntu-Studio-users mailing list
Ubuntu-Studio-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-users

what realtime patch does ubunto studio use?

[Eduardo Montoya]

Hello everyone,

My name is Eduardo and this is my first message in this mailing list.

I have recently downloaded the last ubuntu studio distro and i have installed 
it in my new ASUS PRO58V laptop.
I use it mostly for music but since I am as well a programmer I wanted to do 
some experiments with the realtime programming.

I would like to know if it is using RTAI or RTLINUX.

thanks in advance for your replies.

Regards,

Eduardo
-- 
Ubuntu-Studio-users mailing list
Ubuntu-Studio-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-users

Re: [LAU] ubuntu realtime.

[Hartmut Noack]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

Brent Busby schrieb:
> On Sat, 30 May 2009, Dave Phillips wrote:
> 
>> Is Ubuntu development really this bad ? I find it hard to believe that 
>> such great efforts towards desktop improvements have overshadowed 
>> sheer workability.
> 
> On the bright side, the Ubuntu Studio wallpaper and GDM themes are 
> awe-inspiring.  (Let's hear it for polishing the chrome!)
> 

Unfortunately nobody records a LP using wallpaper or themes...

Pure:Dyne looks quite old-fashioned if not dull and Musix is still
cluttered with bazillions of icons in not-fitting colours.
Yet both have a rock-solid high-performance kernel that runs my
firewire-interface for 10+ houres at 8ms while US with all its beauty on
the surface does not. It crashes jackd within 10 or so minutes if the
firebox runs with settings for more than 20ms.

So I use Kubuntu as my every-day desktop on my laptop and in the studio
I use oldfashioned-not-so-fancy Lenny with Pure:Dyne atop to get
something that works.
In 80% of the time I see Ardour in fullscreen anyway


Please dont get me wrong: I am well aware of the fact, that the people,
that do all the graphical work wont become kernel hackers as soon as
this message arrives. Eye-candy is allways welcome also (Kubuntu 9.4 is
indeed the most beautyfull, intriguing desktop I ever had installed or
even seen so I do NOT critizize these improvements here.

But one thing is for sure:
If Ubuntu Studio does not work at least the same as good for the
musician as other Linux-distros do, it will be irrelevant and obsolete.

best regards

HZN

BTW: If I want to hook my Firebox with the Laptop I use Suse11 with the
jenglh-Kernel. Its not as powerfull a system as Pure:Dyne but it works
acceptable well and is quite beauty and feature-packed also
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with SUSE - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iEYEARECAAYFAkowImEACgkQ1Aecwva1SWPFFgCdGX0BKYgMqaL/bHjmKXj34HYW
DqcAnA/Atn4i2+oSVVCh29pGIHHgCX0p
=7LPk
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

-- 
Ubuntu-Studio-users mailing list
Ubuntu-Studio-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-users

Re: ATI 4830 and realtime-kernel

[sandie]

Gustin Johnson wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> sandie wrote:
>   
>> Luke Yelavich wrote:
>> 
>>> On Wed, Feb 11, 2009 at 04:24:30PM EST, sandie wrote:
>>>   
>>>   
>>>> Hi all
>>>>
>>>> My Nvidia 7950x2 died friday :-(
>>>>
>>>> I have always used Nvidia, but since Ati now have gone open with the 
>>>> specs to their cards, I wanted to support their great initiative and 
>>>> that instalation would be fairly simple. so I bought a ATI 4830 and to 
>>>> my big supprise... Argh !
>>>>
>>>> Is there really no support for Radeon 4830 in the realtime-kernel ???
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> What version of Ubuntu are you using? If its intrepid, when using the 
>>> generic kernel, are you using the proprietary ATI drivers?
>>>
>>> If yes to both questions, then I believe there maybe something wrong with 
>>> the installation/setup of the ATI drivers and the realtime kernel. Without 
>>> having any new ATI hardware to test with here myself, I can't be sure of 
>>> whats going on. All I can suggest is to attempt to re-install 
>>> fglrx-kernel-source, as well as installing the linux-headers-rt package, 
>>> which should allow the kernel module for the ATI drivers to be built.
>>>
>>> Hope this helps
>>>
>>> Luke
>>>   
>>>   
>> Thanks for your answer
>>
>> I have tried both opensource and propriotary drivers in Ipex and Hardy 
>> and both works fine with the generic kernel, but when i try in realtime 
>> i have not been so lucky.
>> I can't get any installer to work, tried the opensource solution listed 
>> here : https://help.ubuntu.com/community/RadeonDriver and the 
>> propriotary installer from ATI. the "system-> administration->hardware 
>> drivers" doesn't even see the card.
>>
>> 
> The project's home page is here:
> http://www.radeonhd.org/
>
> You may need to download build this yourself.
> Of particular interest is this section:
> http://wiki.x.org/wiki/radeonhd#head-f79351b4e2b19fad40529ce297ac2d2a1e90354c
>
> This driver is very much a moving target.  It looks promising but I am
> holding off.  Right now the only video device that I will buy is an
> Intel.  It may not have anywhere near the performance of the ATI and
> Nvidia offerings, but it has a proper upstream driver, which for me is
> far more important.  I do not have any of the supported hardware so I
> cannot be of more use.
>
>   
>> Right now I'm using Ubuntustudio 8.04, but later today I plan to split 
>> my HD and install a Ubuntu 8.10 (generic) on the first half and 
>> Ubuntustudio 8.04 (rt) on the other half.
>> Luckly I also got a new motherboard/cpu/ram, so instalation of 
>> Ubuntustudio only takes about 15 minutes :-)
>> 
>
> I had heard that Intrepid had a version of radeonhd shipping with it.  I
> do not know which version they shipped or how well it works.  Given the
> pace of development, i would guess that the Intrepid driver is already
> stale.
>
> For the record, there are two 3d drivers for ATI hardware. There is the
> classic binary blob called fglrx.  This is the propritary driver and it
> supports older ATI hardware as well.  The newer radeonhd driver only
> supports the latest ATI devices but it is open source, much like the
> Intel driver.  Check the radeonhd site for more info.
>
> Hth,
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
>
> iD8DBQFJkzX0wRXgH3rKGfMRAgKpAKCTxiG35lGfAVbFIkp6bF2pzIuZXwCfa2o5
> WbzZyal44r/+0o3lBPnMofQ=
> =aByv
> -END PGP SIGNATURE-
>
>   
It works :-)
The one in the repositorie did not support my card, but I found this 
simple guide that did the trick : 
http://www.phoronix.com/forums/showthread.php?t=9951

Thank you SO much for pointing me in the right direction :-)

/Sandie

-- 
Ubuntu-Studio-users mailing list
Ubuntu-Studio-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-users

Re: ATI 4830 and realtime-kernel

[Gustin Johnson]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

sandie wrote:
> Luke Yelavich wrote:
>> On Wed, Feb 11, 2009 at 04:24:30PM EST, sandie wrote:
>>   
>>> Hi all
>>>
>>> My Nvidia 7950x2 died friday :-(
>>>
>>> I have always used Nvidia, but since Ati now have gone open with the 
>>> specs to their cards, I wanted to support their great initiative and 
>>> that instalation would be fairly simple. so I bought a ATI 4830 and to 
>>> my big supprise... Argh !
>>>
>>> Is there really no support for Radeon 4830 in the realtime-kernel ???
>>> 
>> What version of Ubuntu are you using? If its intrepid, when using the 
>> generic kernel, are you using the proprietary ATI drivers?
>>
>> If yes to both questions, then I believe there maybe something wrong with 
>> the installation/setup of the ATI drivers and the realtime kernel. Without 
>> having any new ATI hardware to test with here myself, I can't be sure of 
>> whats going on. All I can suggest is to attempt to re-install 
>> fglrx-kernel-source, as well as installing the linux-headers-rt package, 
>> which should allow the kernel module for the ATI drivers to be built.
>>
>> Hope this helps
>>
>> Luke
>>   
> Thanks for your answer
> 
> I have tried both opensource and propriotary drivers in Ipex and Hardy 
> and both works fine with the generic kernel, but when i try in realtime 
> i have not been so lucky.
> I can't get any installer to work, tried the opensource solution listed 
> here : https://help.ubuntu.com/community/RadeonDriver and the 
> propriotary installer from ATI. the "system-> administration->hardware 
> drivers" doesn't even see the card.
> 
The project's home page is here:
http://www.radeonhd.org/

You may need to download build this yourself.
Of particular interest is this section:
http://wiki.x.org/wiki/radeonhd#head-f79351b4e2b19fad40529ce297ac2d2a1e90354c

This driver is very much a moving target.  It looks promising but I am
holding off.  Right now the only video device that I will buy is an
Intel.  It may not have anywhere near the performance of the ATI and
Nvidia offerings, but it has a proper upstream driver, which for me is
far more important.  I do not have any of the supported hardware so I
cannot be of more use.

> Right now I'm using Ubuntustudio 8.04, but later today I plan to split 
> my HD and install a Ubuntu 8.10 (generic) on the first half and 
> Ubuntustudio 8.04 (rt) on the other half.
> Luckly I also got a new motherboard/cpu/ram, so instalation of 
> Ubuntustudio only takes about 15 minutes :-)

I had heard that Intrepid had a version of radeonhd shipping with it.  I
do not know which version they shipped or how well it works.  Given the
pace of development, i would guess that the Intrepid driver is already
stale.

For the record, there are two 3d drivers for ATI hardware. There is the
classic binary blob called fglrx.  This is the propritary driver and it
supports older ATI hardware as well.  The newer radeonhd driver only
supports the latest ATI devices but it is open source, much like the
Intel driver.  Check the radeonhd site for more info.

Hth,
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFJkzX0wRXgH3rKGfMRAgKpAKCTxiG35lGfAVbFIkp6bF2pzIuZXwCfa2o5
WbzZyal44r/+0o3lBPnMofQ=
=aByv
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

-- 
Ubuntu-Studio-users mailing list
Ubuntu-Studio-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-users

Re: ATI 4830 and realtime-kernel

[sandie]

Luke Yelavich wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 11, 2009 at 04:24:30PM EST, sandie wrote:
>   
>> Hi all
>>
>> My Nvidia 7950x2 died friday :-(
>>
>> I have always used Nvidia, but since Ati now have gone open with the 
>> specs to their cards, I wanted to support their great initiative and 
>> that instalation would be fairly simple. so I bought a ATI 4830 and to 
>> my big supprise... Argh !
>>
>> Is there really no support for Radeon 4830 in the realtime-kernel ???
>> 
>
> What version of Ubuntu are you using? If its intrepid, when using the generic 
> kernel, are you using the proprietary ATI drivers?
>
> If yes to both questions, then I believe there maybe something wrong with the 
> installation/setup of the ATI drivers and the realtime kernel. Without having 
> any new ATI hardware to test with here myself, I can't be sure of whats going 
> on. All I can suggest is to attempt to re-install fglrx-kernel-source, as 
> well as installing the linux-headers-rt package, which should allow the 
> kernel module for the ATI drivers to be built.
>
> Hope this helps
>
> Luke
>   
Thanks for your answer

I have tried both opensource and propriotary drivers in Ipex and Hardy 
and both works fine with the generic kernel, but when i try in realtime 
i have not been so lucky.
I can't get any installer to work, tried the opensource solution listed 
here : https://help.ubuntu.com/community/RadeonDriver and the 
propriotary installer from ATI. the "system-> administration->hardware 
drivers" doesn't even see the card.

Right now I'm using Ubuntustudio 8.04, but later today I plan to split 
my HD and install a Ubuntu 8.10 (generic) on the first half and 
Ubuntustudio 8.04 (rt) on the other half.
Luckly I also got a new motherboard/cpu/ram, so instalation of 
Ubuntustudio only takes about 15 minutes :-)

/Sandie

-- 
Ubuntu-Studio-users mailing list
Ubuntu-Studio-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-users

Re: ATI 4830 and realtime-kernel

[Luke Yelavich]

On Wed, Feb 11, 2009 at 04:24:30PM EST, sandie wrote:
> Hi all
> 
> My Nvidia 7950x2 died friday :-(
> 
> I have always used Nvidia, but since Ati now have gone open with the 
> specs to their cards, I wanted to support their great initiative and 
> that instalation would be fairly simple. so I bought a ATI 4830 and to 
> my big supprise... Argh !
> 
> Is there really no support for Radeon 4830 in the realtime-kernel ???

What version of Ubuntu are you using? If its intrepid, when using the generic 
kernel, are you using the proprietary ATI drivers?

If yes to both questions, then I believe there maybe something wrong with the 
installation/setup of the ATI drivers and the realtime kernel. Without having 
any new ATI hardware to test with here myself, I can't be sure of whats going 
on. All I can suggest is to attempt to re-install fglrx-kernel-source, as well 
as installing the linux-headers-rt package, which should allow the kernel 
module for the ATI drivers to be built.

Hope this helps

Luke


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
-- 
Ubuntu-Studio-users mailing list
Ubuntu-Studio-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-users

ATI 4830 and realtime-kernel

[sandie]

Hi all

My Nvidia 7950x2 died friday :-(

I have always used Nvidia, but since Ati now have gone open with the 
specs to their cards, I wanted to support their great initiative and 
that instalation would be fairly simple. so I bought a ATI 4830 and to 
my big supprise... Argh !

Is there really no support for Radeon 4830 in the realtime-kernel ???

Right now I'm running 1280x1024 on a 22" widescreen with the vesa 
driver, is there realy no other options ?

Any help would be much appriciated :-)

btw. it works flawless when I use the generic kernel.

/Sandie

-- 
Ubuntu-Studio-users mailing list
Ubuntu-Studio-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-users

Re: what does thte lack of a realtime kernel mean

[Gustin Johnson]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

aYo Binitie wrote:
> Hi There,
> I've been mulling over whether or not to go to Intrepid. I must confess
> the release note stating the failure of 'real-time kernel' has put me
> off. However I'm quite new to Ubuntuland and would like to know what
> exactly this means in term of performance. I'm no sound or video
> designer, I just like Ustudio but, do a heavy amount of Asctionscript
> development on it. What does the lack of a realtime kernel mean??
> 

Real time kernels are really only applicable to us audio types.  In
regular day to day to use you will not notice any difference (the
standard Ubuntu kernel is not real time btw).

For us audio people, the RT issue is probably a deal breaker for
upgrading right now.  Fortunately we do not have to upgrade immediately
until these issues are sorted.  It will work eventually, this is just
one of those things.

The ubuntu 6 month release is not really well suited to large software
projects, open source or otherwise.  I do not even see this as a "real"
problem.  8.04 is perfectly capable (as is 64Studio which has even older
packages).

-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFJEfznwRXgH3rKGfMRAptIAKCRGQHJW4MNLgmRMcp6nDZFaz4UngCgo6cL
tkp+6RsnX+RVRTewVi2lhxg=
=rAz4
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

-- 
Ubuntu-Studio-users mailing list
Ubuntu-Studio-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-users

what does thte lack of a realtime kernel mean

[aYo Binitie]

Hi There,
I've been mulling over whether or not to go to Intrepid. I must confess the
release note stating the failure of 'real-time kernel' has put me off.
However I'm quite new to Ubuntuland and would like to know what exactly this
means in term of performance. I'm no sound or video designer, I just like
Ustudio but, do a heavy amount of Asctionscript development on it. What does
the lack of a realtime kernel mean??

Gracias
a
-- 
Ubuntu-Studio-users mailing list
Ubuntu-Studio-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-users

Re: realtime?

[Steven Davies-Morris]

sandie wrote:
> Steven Davies-Morris wrote:
>> It took me a few hours before the first blowup occurred. :-)
>> 
> Seam it was a bit premature with my "mission accomplished" 
> statement. I guess you where right when calling it a can of worms, 
> I have never seen so many strange bugs :-)

...and it only gets worse, sad to say. Just run it a while longer, and
make sure you're doing something important so it can really hose you
when it goes off the edge of the cliff. :-(

The Ubuntu Studio team have been warning us on this list for sometime
that there would be real problems to overcome doing an rt kernel-based
Ubuntu Studio 8.10. I had to go find out myself why that was. So did
you. Now we know. I guess it will be along in its own good time.

Your choices: either stay with Hardy for now if you must have the rt
kernel performance. Or try running the 8.10 apps you really have to
have with the 2.2.19 rt kernel and determine if they behave properly.
If your apps set is such that this kluge works on your box, it could
be a viable way to go for the short-term. Or do what I'm going to do
(fast CPU with lots of RAM to burn) and go with the 2.2.27x generic
kernel and move to Intrepid in 4 weeks time (Well..I've made the jump
as of the Intrepid BETA 1 today, but Oct 30th is the release date).
All of which leads to a more formal migration to Ubuntu Studio on
Intrepid when Cory et al say it's ready for prime time using the rt
kernel.
-- 
Cheers, SDM -- a 21st Century Schizoid Man
Systems Theory internet music project: 
on MySpace: 
on Last FM: 
get "Codetalkers" *free* at 
NP: John Martyn "Solid Air"

-- 
Ubuntu-Studio-users mailing list
Ubuntu-Studio-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-users

Re: realtime?

[sandie]

Steven Davies-Morris wrote:
> It took me a few hours before the first blowup occurred. :-)
>   
Seam it was a bit premature with my "mission accomplished" statement.
I guess you where right when calling it a can of worms, I have never 
seen so many strange bugs :-)

-- 
Ubuntu-Studio-users mailing list
Ubuntu-Studio-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-users

Re: realtime? (Intrepid release dates)

[Steven Davies-Morris]

Steven Davies-Morris wrote:
> Christopher Stamper wrote:
>> What's the release dates for Intrepid and 8.10.1?
>>
>> Sure would be nice to have them on the 
>> homepage(ubuntu.com/ubuntustudio.org). 
>> ..
> 
> I think the Intrepid BETA 1 is supposed to be released today or
> tomorrow. And IIRC the official release date for 8.10 proper is Oct 30th.
> 
> Given the issues surrounding a rt kernel for Intrepid I'd expect an
> Intrepid Ubuntu Studio release date to be very much up in the air.

Following up.  Here's a link to the Intrepid release schedule:

-- 
Cheers, SDM -- a 21st Century Schizoid Man
Systems Theory internet music project: 
on MySpace: 
on Last FM: 
get "Codetalkers" *free* at 
NP: Wayne Shorter "Atlantis"

-- 
Ubuntu-Studio-users mailing list
Ubuntu-Studio-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-users

Re: realtime?

[Steven Davies-Morris]

Christopher Stamper wrote:
> What's the release dates for Intrepid and 8.10.1?
> 
> Sure would be nice to have them on the 
> homepage(ubuntu.com/ubuntustudio.org). 
> ..

I think the Intrepid BETA 1 is supposed to be released today or
tomorrow. And IIRC the official release date for 8.10 proper is Oct 30th.

Given the issues surrounding a rt kernel for Intrepid I'd expect an
Intrepid Ubuntu Studio release date to be very much up in the air.
-- 
Cheers, SDM -- a 21st Century Schizoid Man
Systems Theory internet music project: 
on MySpace: 
on Last FM: 
get "Codetalkers" *free* at 
NP: Audience "The House On The Hill"

-- 
Ubuntu-Studio-users mailing list
Ubuntu-Studio-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-users

Re: realtime?

[Christopher Stamper]

What's the release dates for Intrepid and 8.10.1?

Sure would be nice to have them on the homepage(
ubuntu.com/ubuntustudio.org)...

-- 
Christopher Stamper

Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Web: http://tinyurl.com/2ooncg
gTalk: http://tinyurl.com/6e359r
Skype: cdstamper
-- 
Ubuntu-Studio-users mailing list
Ubuntu-Studio-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-users

Re: realtime?

[Steven Davies-Morris]

sandie wrote:
> Steven Davies-Morris wrote:
>> FWIW I've tried Intrepid with the 2.2.26 rt for AMD64 for about 
>> 10 days. In one word "don't". There's a laundry-list of things 
>> that cause the system to lock up and go braindead -- many of them
>>  video and audio driver related. But many apps appear to work on 
>> the generic kernel (performance issues aside). And many of them 
>> appear to work in the latest (Intrepid alpha 6) versions using 
>> the 2.2.19 rt kernel that is available for Hardy.
>> 
>> I have to agree with Cory that for now Ubuntu Studio users should
>>  stick with Hardy because the 2.2.26 rt kernel is not ready to go
>>  as part of Intrepid, let alone as part of Ubuntu Studio
>> Intrepid. That may change in the next 30 days, but I suggest
>> letting Cory et al pull their hair out and swear at their
>> computers dealing with the problems of 2.2.26 rt. YMMV.
>> 
> A non-rt kernel is realy not an option for me, I can't run any of 
> my apps :-( at least not with the preformance I'm used to.

If so then you will need to run 8.04 Hardy for the foreseeable future,
which isn't so bad. IMO Ubuntu Studio on Hardy is pretty swell. But,
if you're dead keen to move forward then it might have to be Intrepid
with the generic kernel...for a while. Which is what I plan to do.

As I indicated, Intrepid Alpha 6 is quite stable using the latest
generic kernel -- actually with applied patches it's now very stable
IMO and probably very close to being a BETA version -- but the same
8.10 apps on the latest develoment rt kernel are still prone to abrupt
app aborts and outright system crashing. (i.e. lobotomizing my AMD64
box 4-6 times a day). And I'm not even talking about freezes in Ubuntu
Studio apps. It'll will be in the middle of something in Firefox or
Nautilus or Open Office and suddenly flatline. :-(

> I managed to install the rt-kernel (32bit) from the repros, a 173 
> Nvidia driver (the 177 didnt work for me), Wine and Wineasio, and 
> have been trying to crash the system for an hour now, without any 
> luck :-)

It took me a few hours before the first blowup occurred. :-) By
contrast nothing is crashing my AMD64 system using 810 with the
generic kernel.

> I use EnergyXT2 with (win)vsti's for drums, bass and keyboards, and
>  then record guitar, vocals and other analog thingies.
> 
> But lets say (for the sake of the argument) that I don't know 
> anything about kernels ;-) Will I still be using all the new stuff 
> in 8.10, xorg, qt ? And will the kernel be updated automaticly 
> when the new one arrive ?

I ran the current rt kernel that ships with Hardy Ubuntu Studio
2.2.19), and a mix of the 8.10 apps. That combo seems to be fairly
stable, but I've only looked at a few audio apps that were of interest
to me. I didn't dig into any video apps, and didn't spend any time on
MIDI, or do any audio that would need very low latency. So take a big
pinch of salt with my saying that the current Ubuntu Studio rt kernel
might work for you with some of the Intrepid apps until the issues of
Intrepid and the 2.2.27x rt kernel get resolved.

> Kind regards Sandie

Good luck to you. The way forward for Ubuntu Studio on Intrepid looks
to be quite an adventure! :-)
-- 
Cheers, SDM -- a 21st Century Schizoid Man
Systems Theory internet music project: 
on MySpace: 
on Last FM: 
get "Codetalkers" *free* at 
NP: Hawkwind "The Hall Of The Mountain Grill"

-- 
Ubuntu-Studio-users mailing list
Ubuntu-Studio-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-users

Re: realtime?

[sandie]

Steven Davies-Morris wrote:
> FWIW I've tried Intrepid with the 2.2.26 rt for AMD64 for about 10
> days. In one word "don't". There's a laundry-list of things that cause
> the system to lock up and go braindead -- many of them video and audio
> driver related. But many apps appear to work on the generic kernel
> (performance issues aside). And many of them appear to work in the
> latest (Intrepid alpha 6) versions using the 2.2.19 rt kernel that is
> available for Hardy.
>
> I have to agree with Cory that for now Ubuntu Studio users should
> stick with Hardy because the 2.2.26 rt kernel is not ready to go as
> part of Intrepid, let alone as part of Ubuntu Studio Intrepid. That
> may change in the next 30 days, but I suggest letting Cory et al pull
> their hair out and swear at their computers dealing with the problems
> of 2.2.26 rt. YMMV.
>   
A non-rt kernel is realy not an option for me, I can't run any of my 
apps :-( at least not with the preformance I'm used to.

I managed to install the rt-kernel (32bit) from the repros, a 173 Nvidia 
driver (the 177 didnt work for me), Wine and Wineasio, and have been 
trying to crash the system for an hour now, without any luck :-)
I use EnergyXT2 with (win)vsti's for drums, bass and keyboards, and then 
record guitar, vocals and other analog thingies.

But lets say (for the sake of the argument) that I don't know anything 
about kernels ;-)
Will I still be using all the new stuff in 8.10, xorg, qt ?
And will the kernel be updated automaticly when the new one arrive ?

Kind regards
Sandie

-- 
Ubuntu-Studio-users mailing list
Ubuntu-Studio-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-users

Re: Ardour on Intrepid [was: Re: realtime?]

[Janne Jokitalo]

On Wed, Oct 01, 2008 at 01:44:12PM -0600, Gustin Johnson wrote:
> To be clear, I meant that he could download and install ardour on 8.04
> (or any version that meets the dependencies).

Yes, I understood completely. However, at this time the question was very
specific, so I wanted to clear that confusion. :)


-- 
Jaska


-- 
Ubuntu-Studio-users mailing list
Ubuntu-Studio-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-users

Re: Ardour on Intrepid [was: Re: realtime?]

[Gustin Johnson]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

Janne Jokitalo wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 01, 2008 at 01:15:16PM -0600, Gustin Johnson wrote:
>>> is it possible to get Ardour 2.5 with Ubuntu Studio 8.10(.1)?
>>>
>> You can always download and compile the newest version.
> 
> Package ardour
> 
> * intrepid (sound): digital audio workstation (graphical gtk2 interface)
> * [universe]
>   1:2.5-0ubuntu4: i386
> 1:2.5-0ubuntu3: amd64
>  also provided by: ardour-i686
> 

To be clear, I meant that he could download and install ardour on 8.04
(or any version that meets the dependencies).

-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFI49MLwRXgH3rKGfMRAvOCAJ9Bnym3flC7S7Hh+wK+3VGcGi813wCgsIBO
HDhLADCRnI8A3W7UPcrohn0=
=idW1
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

-- 
Ubuntu-Studio-users mailing list
Ubuntu-Studio-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-users

Ardour on Intrepid [was: Re: realtime?]

[Janne Jokitalo]

On Wed, Oct 01, 2008 at 01:15:16PM -0600, Gustin Johnson wrote:
> > is it possible to get Ardour 2.5 with Ubuntu Studio 8.10(.1)?
> > 
> You can always download and compile the newest version.

Package ardour

* intrepid (sound): digital audio workstation (graphical gtk2 interface)
* [universe]
  1:2.5-0ubuntu4: i386
  1:2.5-0ubuntu3: amd64
   also provided by: ardour-i686


-- 
Ubuntu-Studio-users mailing list
Ubuntu-Studio-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-users

Re: realtime?

[Gustin Johnson]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

>> Or perhaps 8.10.1, I don't think that 8.10 will have an RT kernel by the
>> release date.  For production machines it seems the advice is to stick
>> with Hardy.
>>   
> thats a pity. i was looking forward to ubuntu 8.10.

It is what it is.
> 
> is it possible to get Ardour 2.5 with Ubuntu Studio 8.10(.1)?
> 
You can always download and compile the newest version.

> Ardour 2 is not very stable on my system. dont know why.
> 
Probably you have jack set too aggressively for your hardware.  Of
course without more information this is just a shot in the dark.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFI48xEwRXgH3rKGfMRAtZLAJ9fV1D6/RrMOo5pKdCBqF0sM0CZOACdEUtS
0ikGEjkxXW6J1CDROAgbOuY=
=qsji
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

-- 
Ubuntu-Studio-users mailing list
Ubuntu-Studio-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-users

Re: realtime?

[[EMAIL PROTECTED]]

Gustin Johnson wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>   
>> hi,
>>
>> i would say: wait for ubuntu-studio 8.10.
>>
>> am i wrong?
>>
>> 
> Or perhaps 8.10.1, I don't think that 8.10 will have an RT kernel by the
> release date.  For production machines it seems the advice is to stick
> with Hardy.
>   
thats a pity. i was looking forward to ubuntu 8.10.

is it possible to get Ardour 2.5 with Ubuntu Studio 8.10(.1)?

Ardour 2 is not very stable on my system. dont know why.

-- 
Ubuntu-Studio-users mailing list
Ubuntu-Studio-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-users

Re: realtime?

[Gustin Johnson]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> hi,
> 
> i would say: wait for ubuntu-studio 8.10.
> 
> am i wrong?
> 
Or perhaps 8.10.1, I don't think that 8.10 will have an RT kernel by the
release date.  For production machines it seems the advice is to stick
with Hardy.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFI46JpwRXgH3rKGfMRApNmAJ9eskmP98TIiHWJ0Vtea3L5r1Ib0wCfYnoA
ydnvjz/aBSG4FJPvzHksV0I=
=4cjS
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

-- 
Ubuntu-Studio-users mailing list
Ubuntu-Studio-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-users

Re: realtime?

[Steven Davies-Morris]

Cory K. wrote:
> sandie wrote:
>> Hi
>> 
>> I just joined this list, so please bear with me if this has been
>> asked a thousand times before :-) Is there any word about a
>> realtime kernel in Ubustu-Ipex ? and if not... is there a
>> beginners guide to building it yourself ?
>> 
> 
> Intrepid will not be *shipping* with -rt. We intend to make every
> effort to get it in after release but many things will have to fall
> into place. Preliminary tests show that the current Hardy -rt
> kernel works minus some issues with non-free drivers but installing
> -generic *before* upgrading might be a good idea. We're looking at
> things to make this easier atm. Users are encouraged to stick with
> Hardy on production machines. Efforts will be made to backport
> packages like Ardour.
> 
> As far as building -rt from scratch, I'm sure others can chime in.
> Note that upstream -rt currently does not support 2.6.27.
> (2.6.26.5-rt9 is latest patch) This is a part of the reason for no
> -rt in Intrepid.
> 
> -Cory K.

FWIW I've tried Intrepid with the 2.2.26 rt for AMD64 for about 10
days. In one word "don't". There's a laundry-list of things that cause
the system to lock up and go braindead -- many of them video and audio
driver related. But many apps appear to work on the generic kernel
(performance issues aside). And many of them appear to work in the
latest (Intrepid alpha 6) versions using the 2.2.19 rt kernel that is
available for Hardy.

I have to agree with Cory that for now Ubuntu Studio users should
stick with Hardy because the 2.2.26 rt kernel is not ready to go as
part of Intrepid, let alone as part of Ubuntu Studio Intrepid. That
may change in the next 30 days, but I suggest letting Cory et al pull
their hair out and swear at their computers dealing with the problems
of 2.2.26 rt. YMMV.
-- 
Cheers, SDM -- a 21st Century Schizoid Man
Systems Theory internet music project: 
on MySpace: 
on Last FM: 
get "Codetalkers" *free* at 
NP: nothing

-- 
Ubuntu-Studio-users mailing list
Ubuntu-Studio-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-users

Re: realtime?

[[EMAIL PROTECTED]]

hi,

i would say: wait for ubuntu-studio 8.10.

am i wrong?




sandie wrote:
> Hi
>
> I just joined this list, so please bear with me if this has been asked a 
> thousand times before :-)
> Is there any word about a realtime kernel in Ubustu-Ipex ? and if not... 
> is there a beginners guide to building it yourself ?
>
> Sandie
>
>   


-- 
Ubuntu-Studio-users mailing list
Ubuntu-Studio-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-users

Re: realtime?

[Cory K.]

sandie wrote:
> Hi
>
> I just joined this list, so please bear with me if this has been asked a 
> thousand times before :-)
> Is there any word about a realtime kernel in Ubustu-Ipex ? and if not... 
> is there a beginners guide to building it yourself ?
>   

Intrepid will not be *shipping* with -rt. We intend to make every effort
to get it in after release but many things will have to fall into place.
Preliminary tests show that the current Hardy -rt kernel works minus
some issues with non-free drivers but installing -generic *before*
upgrading might be a good idea. We're looking at things to make this
easier atm. Users are encouraged to stick with Hardy on production
machines. Efforts will be made to backport packages like Ardour.

As far as building -rt from scratch, I'm sure others can chime in. Note
that upstream -rt currently does not support 2.6.27. (2.6.26.5-rt9 is
latest patch) This is a part of the reason for no -rt in Intrepid.

-Cory K.

-- 
Ubuntu-Studio-users mailing list
Ubuntu-Studio-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-users

realtime?

[sandie]

Hi

I just joined this list, so please bear with me if this has been asked a 
thousand times before :-)
Is there any word about a realtime kernel in Ubustu-Ipex ? and if not... 
is there a beginners guide to building it yourself ?

Sandie

-- 
Ubuntu-Studio-users mailing list
Ubuntu-Studio-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-users

Re: realtime kernel

[Jason Schaefer]

This is the only thing I could find on linux rt users ->
http://marc.info/?l=linux-rt-users&m=120819129725838&w=2

It requires quilt which I have not used before and have not taken the
time to play with... So for now I just built the 2.6.24.4

Thanks for the replies!

Jason


On Wed, May 7, 2008 at 9:13 AM, Gustin Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
>  Hash: SHA1
>
>
> Luke Yelavich wrote:
>  | On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 03:18:04AM EST, Jason Schaefer wrote:
>  |> Hello
>  |>
>  |> I want to build 2.6.25 realtime, where is the appropriate patch for
>  |> this?
>  |
>  | You can find it here: http://people.redhat.com/~mingo/realtime-preempt.
>
>  That just redirects to the kernel.org site:
>
> http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/projects/rt/
>
>  There does not yet appear to be patches for 2.6.25
>
>  | Luke
>
> |
>  -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
>  Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
>  Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
>
>  iD8DBQFIIccewRXgH3rKGfMRAli8AJ9J032txFCdzlW5eylmWTV7pABJeACgmZoG
>  bFexdS3/F4arjNdh21045YI=
>  =piYC
>  -END PGP SIGNATURE-
>
>
>
>  --
>  Ubuntu-Studio-users mailing list
>  Ubuntu-Studio-users@lists.ubuntu.com
>  Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-users
>

-- 
Ubuntu-Studio-users mailing list
Ubuntu-Studio-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-users

Re: realtime kernel

[Gustin Johnson]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

Luke Yelavich wrote:
| On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 03:18:04AM EST, Jason Schaefer wrote:
|> Hello
|>
|> I want to build 2.6.25 realtime, where is the appropriate patch for
|> this?
|
| You can find it here: http://people.redhat.com/~mingo/realtime-preempt.

That just redirects to the kernel.org site:
http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/projects/rt/

There does not yet appear to be patches for 2.6.25

| Luke
|
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFIIccewRXgH3rKGfMRAli8AJ9J032txFCdzlW5eylmWTV7pABJeACgmZoG
bFexdS3/F4arjNdh21045YI=
=piYC
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

-- 
Ubuntu-Studio-users mailing list
Ubuntu-Studio-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-users

Re: realtime kernel

[Luke Yelavich]

On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 03:18:04AM EST, Jason Schaefer wrote:
> Hello
> 
> I want to build 2.6.25 realtime, where is the appropriate patch for
> this?

You can find it here: http://people.redhat.com/~mingo/realtime-preempt.

Luke

-- 
Ubuntu-Studio-users mailing list
Ubuntu-Studio-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-users

Re: realtime kernel

[Gustin Johnson]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

That is where I have always gone for the rt patches.  I am not aware of
any other locations.

Jason Schaefer wrote:
| Hello
|
| I want to build 2.6.25 realtime, where is the appropriate patch for
| this? There are lots of references to various patches and its
| confusing not to mention
| http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/projects/rt/ only has 2.6.24
| patches.
| TIA! -Jason
|
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFIIKCDwRXgH3rKGfMRAlnyAJ42kwp4seWphznJqACrmMFmyVgMnwCgnKZz
QEbH2fmhXnlZ40QiYOztfdQ=
=QQZI
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

-- 
Ubuntu-Studio-users mailing list
Ubuntu-Studio-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-users

realtime kernel

[Jason Schaefer]

Hello

I want to build 2.6.25 realtime, where is the appropriate patch for
this? There are lots of references to various patches and its
confusing not to mention
http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/projects/rt/ only has 2.6.24
patches.
TIA! -Jason

-- 
Ubuntu-Studio-users mailing list
Ubuntu-Studio-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-users

Setting up realtime-lsm on Hardy

[Sayash Kumar]

Hi,

I followed this procedure for setting up the realtime kernel to use with JACK.

First, i used apt-get to install linux-rt, module-assistant,
realtime-lsm. Then used the standard module-assistant steps of update,
prepare, select etc. to build the realtime-lsm module against the
headers  for linux-2.6.24-5-rt .

But they fail to build with this error message as one of the last few
lines of output

Failed: Security Capabilities not configured as module
Realtime LSM will not work with /usr/src/linux-headers-2.6.24-5-rt
Please rerun 'make config' on the kernel and try again.

Any ideas?

Sayash

-- 
Ubuntu-Studio-users mailing list
Ubuntu-Studio-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-users

Re: qjackctl realtime question

[Hartmut Noack]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

Jonathan Leonard schrieb:
>> Hartmut Noack wrote:
>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb:
>>>
>>> looks like your /etc/security/limits.conf is not set properly. An
>>> Upgrade to studio seems to fail to set this,
>> No. A upgrade handles it fine. There's a point in the upgrade where it
>> will ask you if you want to replace the file. You gotta say no. ;)
> 
> Great.  Now I have to fix that...wonder what else is screwed up.   
> Probably killed all the realtime settings as wellpbb!!!
> 
> 
it is not really such a big deal to do these settings nowadays. Within
10 min or so you should be OK again
;-)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFHIo041Aecwva1SWMRAhRsAKCQRZ71tuCDDje8CQqzBgtd01zjJgCfbNrv
JDLsoahZjTzFhXkIFg+XNqQ=
=QeiG
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

-- 
Ubuntu-Studio-users mailing list
Ubuntu-Studio-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-users

Re: qjackctl realtime question

[Hartmut Noack]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

[EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb:
> hello
> thanks very much for your answers!
> 
> i tried to recommended solution:
> 
>>> looks like your /etc/security/limits.conf is not set properly. An
>>> Upgrade to studio seems to fail to set this, the install from DVD does
>>> this OK. This file needs to have the following 3 lines at its end:
>>>
>>> @audio  -   rtprio  99
>>> @audio  -   memlock 86
>>> @audio  -   nice-10
> 
> but this didn't seem to make a difference. is there something else i 
> need to do?

what says:

#uname -a

?

and:


#cat /etc/groups|grep audio


?

If you got the rt-kernel running and if you are in group audio,
everything should be at its best...
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFHIoxU1Aecwva1SWMRAueQAJ4xKRp7B4TGMuNp1EUmkTUcsmR49wCbBUak
TZWFJvUx8kAFMWKuZfwhy+8=
=phBY
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

-- 
Ubuntu-Studio-users mailing list
Ubuntu-Studio-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-users

Re: qjackctl realtime question

[jk]

hello
thanks very much for your answers!

i tried to recommended solution:

>> looks like your /etc/security/limits.conf is not set properly. An
>> Upgrade to studio seems to fail to set this, the install from DVD does
>> this OK. This file needs to have the following 3 lines at its end:
>> 
>> @audio  -   rtprio  99
>> @audio  -   memlock 86
>> @audio  -   nice-10

but this didn't seem to make a difference. is there something else i 
need to do?

jason

-- 
Ubuntu-Studio-users mailing list
Ubuntu-Studio-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-users

Re: qjackctl realtime question

[Jonathan Leonard]

> Hartmut Noack wrote:
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb:
>>
>> looks like your /etc/security/limits.conf is not set properly. An
>> Upgrade to studio seems to fail to set this,
>
> No. A upgrade handles it fine. There's a point in the upgrade where it
> will ask you if you want to replace the file. You gotta say no. ;)

Great.  Now I have to fix that...wonder what else is screwed up.   
Probably killed all the realtime settings as wellpbb!!!


-- 
Ubuntu-Studio-users mailing list
Ubuntu-Studio-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-users

Re: qjackctl realtime question

[Cory K.]

Hartmut Noack wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb:
>
> looks like your /etc/security/limits.conf is not set properly. An
> Upgrade to studio seems to fail to set this,

No. A upgrade handles it fine. There's a point in the upgrade where it
will ask you if you want to replace the file. You gotta say no. ;)

-- 
Ubuntu-Studio-users mailing list
Ubuntu-Studio-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-users

Re: qjackctl realtime question

[Hartmut Noack]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

[EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb:

looks like your /etc/security/limits.conf is not set properly. An
Upgrade to studio seems to fail to set this, the install from DVD does
this OK. This file needs to have the following 3 lines at its end:

@audio  -   rtprio  99
@audio  -   memlock 86
@audio  -   nice-10


and you have to be in group audio of course ;-)

good luck;-)

HZN


> hello
> 
> i am trying to use qjackctl with the realtime option checked, so far
> with no luck.
> 
> i get the following information in the messages window:
> 
> 08:36:06.348 Patchbay deactivated.
> 08:36:06.358 Statistics reset.
> JACK tmpdir identified as [/dev/shm]
> 08:36:06.424 MIDI connection graph change.
> 08:36:06.611 MIDI connection change.
> 08:38:45.061 Startup script...
> 08:38:45.061 artsshell -q terminate
> JACK tmpdir identified as [/dev/shm]
> can't create mcop directory
> Link points to "/tmp/ksocket-jason"
> 08:38:45.547 Startup script terminated with exit status=256.
> 08:38:45.547 JACK is starting...
> 08:38:45.547 /usr/bin/jackd -R -dalsa -dhw:0 -r44100 -p512 -n3 -P -m -S
> 08:38:45.548 JACK was started with PID=5899 (0x170b).
> jackd 0.103.0
> Copyright 2001-2005 Paul Davis and others.
> jackd comes with ABSOLUTELY NO WARRANTY
> This is free software, and you are welcome to redistribute it
> under certain conditions; see the file COPYING for details
> JACK compiled with System V SHM support.
> cannot use real-time scheduling (FIFO at priority 10) [for thread
> -1210570048, from thread -1210570048] (1: Operation not permitted)
> cannot create engine
> 08:38:45.651 JACK was stopped successfully.
> 08:38:45.651 Post-shutdown script...
> 08:38:45.651 killall jackd
> jackd: no process killed
> 08:38:45.858 Post-shutdown script terminated with exit status=256.
> 08:38:47.575 Could not connect to JACK server as client. Please check
> the messages window for more info.
> JACK tmpdir identified as [/dev/shm]
> 
> my set-up in qjackctl is:
> server path: /usr/bin/jack
> driver: alsa
> frames/period: 512
> sample rate: 44100
> periods/buffer/3
> interface: (default)
> dither: none
> audio: playback only
> 
> i am using kernel 2.6.22-14-rt on a lenovo t61 laptop with hda intel or
> AD198x Analog sound cards.
> qjackctl version 0.2.22
> alsa-base version 1.0.14-1
> 
> i'm not really getting any x-runs with my settings, but i figured since
> i am running the realtime kernel i should also be able to use this with
> qjackctl.
> 
> thanks in advance for any help!
> 
> jason
> 
> 

-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFHIhPx1Aecwva1SWMRAgEHAJ9go3MUmQ0H3Fr5NrjD7qlq9SRffACfQnFu
mvjJsuHO3PAf0NLHI9mWka4=
=M00J
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

-- 
Ubuntu-Studio-users mailing list
Ubuntu-Studio-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-users

qjackctl realtime question

[jk]

hello

i am trying to use qjackctl with the realtime option checked, so far
with no luck.

i get the following information in the messages window:

08:36:06.348 Patchbay deactivated.
08:36:06.358 Statistics reset.
JACK tmpdir identified as [/dev/shm]
08:36:06.424 MIDI connection graph change.
08:36:06.611 MIDI connection change.
08:38:45.061 Startup script...
08:38:45.061 artsshell -q terminate
JACK tmpdir identified as [/dev/shm]
can't create mcop directory
Link points to "/tmp/ksocket-jason"
08:38:45.547 Startup script terminated with exit status=256.
08:38:45.547 JACK is starting...
08:38:45.547 /usr/bin/jackd -R -dalsa -dhw:0 -r44100 -p512 -n3 -P -m -S
08:38:45.548 JACK was started with PID=5899 (0x170b).
jackd 0.103.0
Copyright 2001-2005 Paul Davis and others.
jackd comes with ABSOLUTELY NO WARRANTY
This is free software, and you are welcome to redistribute it
under certain conditions; see the file COPYING for details
JACK compiled with System V SHM support.
cannot use real-time scheduling (FIFO at priority 10) [for thread
-1210570048, from thread -1210570048] (1: Operation not permitted)
cannot create engine
08:38:45.651 JACK was stopped successfully.
08:38:45.651 Post-shutdown script...
08:38:45.651 killall jackd
jackd: no process killed
08:38:45.858 Post-shutdown script terminated with exit status=256.
08:38:47.575 Could not connect to JACK server as client. Please check
the messages window for more info.
JACK tmpdir identified as [/dev/shm]

my set-up in qjackctl is:
server path: /usr/bin/jack
driver: alsa
frames/period: 512
sample rate: 44100
periods/buffer/3
interface: (default)
dither: none
audio: playback only

i am using kernel 2.6.22-14-rt on a lenovo t61 laptop with hda intel or
AD198x Analog sound cards.
qjackctl version 0.2.22
alsa-base version 1.0.14-1

i'm not really getting any x-runs with my settings, but i figured since
i am running the realtime kernel i should also be able to use this with
qjackctl.

thanks in advance for any help!

jason


-- 
Ubuntu-Studio-users mailing list
Ubuntu-Studio-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-users

Re: Gutsy realtime kernel

[Jussi Schultink]

Hmmm, sounds like you need to install the restricted modules for the rt kernel.

Try:

sudo apt-get install linux-rt


Hope this helps

Jussi

On 10/17/07, raydar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Wed, 2007-10-17 at 12:00 +0100,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > Considering Ubuntustudio gutsy is days away from release, there is little 
> > to no point, as
> > UbuntuStudio gutsy will have a realtime kernel.
>
> I've been Gutsy beta- & release-candidate testing for a couple weeks,
> and the realtime kernel came down the pipe just the other day.  After it
> installed and I rebooted, X failed to start properly.  I went back &
> booted the "generic" kernel and all was well.
>
> I did see something mentioned in the Ubuntu Forums about video being
> sensitive to kernel latency/preepmtion settings, and I have an Nvidia
> card that X didn't like under Gutsy until a new Gutsy "nvidia" (as
> opposed to the open-source "nv") driver became available.
>
> Does this make anyone think, "Oh, that's because . . ." or "Just do
> this . . ."?   Hopefully more ugrades/updates will arrive & will fix it;
> release day hasn't actually arrived, after all.
>
> (I also started a thread at
> http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=577140 ).
>
>
> --
> Ubuntu-Studio-users mailing list
> Ubuntu-Studio-users@lists.ubuntu.com
> Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-users
>

-- 
Ubuntu-Studio-users mailing list
Ubuntu-Studio-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-users

Re: Gutsy realtime kernel

[raydar]

On Wed, 2007-10-17 at 12:00 +0100,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

> Considering Ubuntustudio gutsy is days away from release, there is little to 
> no point, as 
> UbuntuStudio gutsy will have a realtime kernel.

I've been Gutsy beta- & release-candidate testing for a couple weeks,
and the realtime kernel came down the pipe just the other day.  After it
installed and I rebooted, X failed to start properly.  I went back &
booted the "generic" kernel and all was well.

I did see something mentioned in the Ubuntu Forums about video being
sensitive to kernel latency/preepmtion settings, and I have an Nvidia
card that X didn't like under Gutsy until a new Gutsy "nvidia" (as
opposed to the open-source "nv") driver became available.

Does this make anyone think, "Oh, that's because . . ." or "Just do
this . . ."?   Hopefully more ugrades/updates will arrive & will fix it;
release day hasn't actually arrived, after all.

(I also started a thread at
http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=577140 ).


-- 
Ubuntu-Studio-users mailing list
Ubuntu-Studio-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-users