On Tue, 2012-02-28 at 16:34 -0500, Paul Coccoli wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 8:43 PM, James Morris wrote:
> > On Mon, 27 Feb 2012 20:01:18 -0500
> > Paul Coccoli wrote:
> [Mass snippage]
> >> Why not just use 2 ringbuffers: one to send pointers to the RT thread,
> >> and a second to send them
Thanks for all the comments everyone!
iain
On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 1:34 PM, Paul Coccoli wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 8:43 PM, James Morris wrote:
> > On Mon, 27 Feb 2012 20:01:18 -0500
> > Paul Coccoli wrote:
> [Mass snippage]
> >> Why not just use 2 ringbuffers: one to send pointers to t
On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 8:43 PM, James Morris wrote:
> On Mon, 27 Feb 2012 20:01:18 -0500
> Paul Coccoli wrote:
[Mass snippage]
>> Why not just use 2 ringbuffers: one to send pointers to the RT thread,
>> and a second to send them back to the low prio thread (so it can free
>> them). You probabl
On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 1:01 AM, Paul Coccoli wrote:
> Why not just use 2 ringbuffers: one to send pointers to the RT thread,
> and a second to send them back to the low prio thread (so it can free
> them)
>
The entire Luppp engine is based around that principle. The only downside
is that one can
On Mon, 2012-02-27 at 20:01 -0500, Paul Coccoli wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 8:04 AM, Fons Adriaensen wrote:
> > On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 09:59:19AM +0100, Nick Copeland wrote:
> >
> >> Both of these methods are affectively the same, what you are trying to do
> >> is provide
> >> a method that
On Mon, 27 Feb 2012 20:01:18 -0500
Paul Coccoli wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 8:04 AM, Fons Adriaensen
> wrote:
> > On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 09:59:19AM +0100, Nick Copeland wrote:
> >
> >> Both of these methods are affectively the same, what you are
> >> trying to do is provide a method that t
On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 8:04 AM, Fons Adriaensen wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 09:59:19AM +0100, Nick Copeland wrote:
>
>> Both of these methods are affectively the same, what you are trying to do is
>> provide
>> a method that the low prio thread is responsible for both malloc and free.
>
> T
On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 09:59:19AM +0100, Nick Copeland wrote:
> Both of these methods are affectively the same, what you are trying to do is
> provide
> a method that the low prio thread is responsible for both malloc and free.
That's a nice method, it effectively uses the LFQ to 'send back' a
Hi
It's good to work with pointers, as Nick pointed out.
If that is not possilbe for any reason,
an options is to use a (pre-allocated) memory pool.
You might want to examine this library : TLSF
http://www.gii.upv.es/tlsf/
" I could allocate in the non-realtime thread and then pass memory
over
: Mon, 27 Feb 2012 09:38:34 +0100
> From: t...@quitte.de
> To: a...@drcomp.erfurt.thur.de
> CC: linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org
> Subject: Re: [LAD] memory allocation for the real time thread,
> opinions wanted
>
> [Adrian Knoth]
>
> >Iain Duncan wrote:
[Adrian Knoth]
>Iain Duncan wrote:
>
>Hi
>
>>- I could pre-allocate a giant list of messages and pluck the data off
>>that
>>list when I need to make a new one
>>- I could pre-allocate a block of memory and allocate off that
>
>I'm writing from my phone, so for the sake of brevity, I will only
>
Iain Duncan wrote:
Hi
>- I could pre-allocate a giant list of messages and pluck the data off
>that
>list when I need to make a new one
>- I could pre-allocate a block of memory and allocate off that
I'm writing from my phone, so for the sake of brevity, I will only talk about
one option you m
On Sat, Feb 25, 2012 at 2:25 PM, Iain Duncan wrote:
> Hi everyone, hoping to get opinions from gurus on here, who have been
> *incredibly* helpful in getting my project to where its at. A million thank
> yous!
>
> Ok, the situation so far, which is working well:
> - the app uses a generalized 'mes
Hi everyone, hoping to get opinions from gurus on here, who have been
*incredibly* helpful in getting my project to where its at. A million thank
yous!
Ok, the situation so far, which is working well:
- the app uses a generalized 'message' structure, all the different forms
of messages fit into th
14 matches
Mail list logo
