Re: Kernel-lowlatency vs kernel-rt

2012-11-03 Thread Ralf Mardorf
On Sat, 3 Nov 2012 01:19:53 +0100 ttoine tto...@ttoine.net wrote: Ralf, If you don't need restricted drivers, -rt kernel is better than the -lowlatency. For audio, and for midi. If you need the restricted driver of, for example, nvidia or amd/ati graphic cards, -rt may not work. That's why

Re: Kernel-lowlatency vs kernel-rt

2012-11-03 Thread Ralf Mardorf
On Sat, 3 Nov 2012 10:06:00 +0100 Ralf Mardorf ralf.mard...@alice-dsl.net wrote: spinymouse@qrc:~$ cat /proc/interrupts CPU0 CPU1 0:132 0 IO-APIC-edge timer 1: 3 5862 IO-APIC-edge i8042 7: 1 0

Re: Kernel-lowlatency vs kernel-rt

2012-11-03 Thread Kaj Ailomaa
On Sat, 03 Nov 2012 10:06:00 +0100, Ralf Mardorf ralf.mard...@alice-dsl.net wrote: On Sat, 03 Nov 2012 01:30:40 +0100 Kaj Ailomaa zeque...@mousike.me wrote: Did you compare with a lowlatency of the same kernel version? If not, the test is not very conclusive. If you like to see some good

Re: Kernel-lowlatency vs kernel-rt

2012-11-03 Thread Ralf Mardorf
On Sat, 03 Nov 2012 10:45:14 +0100 Kaj Ailomaa zeque...@mousike.me wrote: Hi Kaj :) with kernels 2.6.39 (ALSA 1.0.24) my card doesn't work and for 2.6 kernels at least the rtirq confg needs to be rewritten. Yes, it was with 2.6.39 that it became possible to use rtirq script with a

Re: Kernel-lowlatency vs kernel-rt

2012-11-03 Thread ttoine
Ralf, are you using a restricted driver for your ATI graphic card ? Wich desktop environment are you using ? Wich version of Ubuntu or Ubuntu Studio ? 2012/11/3 Ralf Mardorf ralf.mard...@alice-dsl.net On Sat, 03 Nov 2012 10:45:14 +0100 Kaj Ailomaa zeque...@mousike.me wrote: Hi Kaj :)

Re: Kernel-lowlatency vs kernel-rt

2012-11-03 Thread Ralf Mardorf
On Sat, 3 Nov 2012 23:49:38 +0100 ttoine tto...@ttoine.net wrote: Ralf, are you using a restricted driver for your ATI graphic card ? Wich desktop environment are you using ? Wich version of Ubuntu or Ubuntu Studio ? The driver is the radeon (FLOSS), the DE is Xfce4 on Ubuntu Studio Quantal

Kernel-lowlatency vs kernel-rt

2012-11-02 Thread Ralf Mardorf
Hi :) on Ubuntu Studio Quantal I switched to $ uname -a Linux qrc 3.6.5-rt14 #1 SMP PREEMPT RT Fri Nov 2 21:36:37 CET 2012 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux A kernel-rt seems to be much better on my machine. With the kernel-lowlatency for a very small audio session, CPU usage 10%, I get xruns

Re: Kernel-lowlatency vs kernel-rt

2012-11-02 Thread Kaj Ailomaa
On Fri, 02 Nov 2012 23:58:39 +0100, Ralf Mardorf ralf.mard...@alice-dsl.net wrote: Hi :) on Ubuntu Studio Quantal I switched to $ uname -a Linux qrc 3.6.5-rt14 #1 SMP PREEMPT RT Fri Nov 2 21:36:37 CET 2012 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux A kernel-rt seems to be much better on my machine.

Re: Kernel-lowlatency vs kernel-rt

2012-11-02 Thread ttoine
I am running 3.5.0.17 -lowlatency, I think from KXstudio repositories. Works great with Ubuntu 12.10. 2012/11/3 Kaj Ailomaa zeque...@mousike.me On Fri, 02 Nov 2012 23:58:39 +0100, Ralf Mardorf ralf.mard...@alice-dsl.net wrote: Hi :) on Ubuntu Studio Quantal I switched to $ uname -a

Re: Kernel-lowlatency vs kernel-rt

2012-11-02 Thread Len Ovens
On Fri, November 2, 2012 6:45 pm, Ho Wan Chan wrote: -lowlatency kernels aren't from KXStudio, it is in the official Ubuntu repositories, and we include it in our live images. Andy Whitcroft of Canonical is the main maintainer of the -lowlatency kernels, though I think our kernel team

Re: Kernel-lowlatency vs kernel-rt

2012-11-02 Thread Len Ovens
On Fri, November 2, 2012 3:58 pm, Ralf Mardorf wrote: Hi :) on Ubuntu Studio Quantal I switched to $ uname -a Linux qrc 3.6.5-rt14 #1 SMP PREEMPT RT Fri Nov 2 21:36:37 CET 2012 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux A kernel-rt seems to be much better on my machine. With the kernel-lowlatency