On Wed, 2012-05-09 at 19:16 +0200, Kaj Ailomaa wrote:
> On 05/09/2012 07:00 PM, Kaj Ailomaa wrote:
> > Here's the address to the current git source
> > git://kernel.ubuntu.com/themuso/ubuntu-precise-lowlatency
> >
>
> [snip] there's one config that is the basis for all the -lowlatency
> builds, wh
On 05/09/2012 07:19 PM, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
On Wed, 2012-05-09 at 18:54 +0200, Kaj Ailomaa wrote:
"threadirqs" and the rtirq script are actually making one of my
machines misbehave
What exactly happens?
- Ralf
I don't know. Haven't had the time to find out yet. I get massive
amounts of
On Wed, 2012-05-09 at 18:54 +0200, Kaj Ailomaa wrote:
> "threadirqs" and the rtirq script are actually making one of my
> machines misbehave
What exactly happens?
- Ralf
--
Ubuntu-Studio-devel mailing list
Ubuntu-Studio-devel@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
https://lists.
On 05/09/2012 07:00 PM, Kaj Ailomaa wrote:
Here's the address to the current git source
git://kernel.ubuntu.com/themuso/ubuntu-precise-lowlatency
Since I'm not a kernel maintainer myself, I don't know the full story
behind how the source is generated or built. But, you will find the most
int
On 05/09/2012 11:02 AM, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
On Tue, 2012-05-08 at 14:09 -0700, Scott Lavender wrote:
"--"
Please don't post under the signature lines ;).
my understanding is that the patch is what actually changes the config
file. perhaps I am mistaken, however.
It's likely that
On 05/09/2012 11:02 AM, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
On Tue, 2012-05-08 at 14:09 -0700, Scott Lavender wrote:
"--"
Please don't post under the signature lines ;).
my understanding is that the patch is what actually changes the config
file. perhaps I am mistaken, however.
It's likely that
On 05/09/2012 05:50 PM, Len Ovens wrote:
On Wed, May 9, 2012 1:39 am, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
On Tue, 2012-05-08 at 22:02 +0200, Kaj Ailomaa wrote:
# CONFIG_NO_HZ is not set
I and many others used NO_HZ yes for a long time without any issues. For
testing purpose I switched to not set too.
The
On Wed, May 9, 2012 1:39 am, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> On Tue, 2012-05-08 at 22:02 +0200, Kaj Ailomaa wrote:
>
>> # CONFIG_NO_HZ is not set
>
> I and many others used NO_HZ yes for a long time without any issues. For
> testing purpose I switched to not set too.
There are still some tweaks we need to
On Tue, 2012-05-08 at 14:09 -0700, Scott Lavender wrote:
> "--"
Please don't post under the signature lines ;).
> my understanding is that the patch is what actually changes the config
> file. perhaps I am mistaken, however.
It's likely that you're right, since
spinymouse@precise:~$
On Tue, 2012-05-08 at 22:02 +0200, Kaj Ailomaa wrote:
> # CONFIG_NO_HZ is not set
I and many others used NO_HZ yes for a long time without any issues. For
testing purpose I switched to not set too.
Don't forget to enable hrtimer/hpet modules and not to set all kinds of
trace/debug options.
Defa
On Tue, May 8, 2012 8:37 am, Scott Lavender wrote:
>
> Secondly, I hope to talk to some of the JuJu [0] people about the
> possibility that JuJu might help with Studio in any way. My poor
> explanation is that JuJu is a simplified way to deploy and manage web
> applications in a scalable manner.
On Tue, May 8, 2012 at 1:02 PM, Kaj Ailomaa wrote:
> On 05/08/2012 09:45 PM, Scott Lavender wrote:
>
>>
>>
> I don't think this is true.
>
> There are at least two separate things that differ between the
> ubuntu-precise kernel, and the ubuntu-precise-lowlatency kernel.
>
> One is a patch to the
On 05/08/2012 09:45 PM, Scott Lavender wrote:
On Tue, May 8, 2012 at 11:02 AM, Ralf Mardorfwrote:
I've got no time to read the whole thread, since I need to repair my
mixer. However, for a full preempt non-rt kernel there is no patch
required. It only depends to the config of a vanilla kernel.
On Tue, May 8, 2012 at 11:02 AM, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
>
> I've got no time to read the whole thread, since I need to repair my
> mixer. However, for a full preempt non-rt kernel there is no patch
> required. It only depends to the config of a vanilla kernel.
>
> Regarding to the CONFIG options in t
On Tue, 2012-05-08 at 20:27 +0200, Kaj Ailomaa wrote:
> What do mean by a "full" preempt non-rt kernel?
The first three kernels are full preempt, not voluntary. With full
preempt I mean that it's the most hard real-time kernel of all preempt
non-rt kernels. You can build it without a patch-rt, tho
On 05/08/2012 08:02 PM, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
On Tue, 2012-05-08 at 19:43 +0200, Kaj Ailomaa wrote:
On 05/08/2012 07:29 PM, Kaj Ailomaa wrote:
On 05/08/2012 05:37 PM, Scott Lavender wrote:
Hello everyone,
There are a few interesting developments that should be shared.
Firstly, there are discus
On Tue, 2012-05-08 at 19:43 +0200, Kaj Ailomaa wrote:
> On 05/08/2012 07:29 PM, Kaj Ailomaa wrote:
> > On 05/08/2012 05:37 PM, Scott Lavender wrote:
> >> Hello everyone,
> >>
> >> There are a few interesting developments that should be shared.
> >>
> >> Firstly, there are discussions about moving t
On 05/08/2012 07:29 PM, Kaj Ailomaa wrote:
On 05/08/2012 05:37 PM, Scott Lavender wrote:
Hello everyone,
There are a few interesting developments that should be shared.
Firstly, there are discussions about moving the -lowlatency kernel
maintenance into the kernel team as it was pointed out tha
On 05/08/2012 05:37 PM, Scott Lavender wrote:
Hello everyone,
There are a few interesting developments that should be shared.
Firstly, there are discussions about moving the -lowlatency kernel
maintenance into the kernel team as it was pointed out that the patch is
"something like a two line" p
Hello everyone,
There are a few interesting developments that should be shared.
Firstly, there are discussions about moving the -lowlatency kernel
maintenance into the kernel team as it was pointed out that the patch is
"something like a two line" patch. I don't actually know how long our
patch
20 matches
Mail list logo
