Le 27 janv. 2010 à 21:02, Jörn Nettingsmeier a écrit : > On 01/27/2010 08:39 PM, alex stone wrote: > >> It's been a good day, and i've enjoyed the stability. I used jack1 >> before, because it gave me fewer challenges, xruns and occasional pops >> and spits, than jack2, which i ended up having to ease out to >> 48000/512/3, to reach near the same performance. (i'm on 48000/256/3 >> with jack1) > > for some more anecdotal evidence, this is about what i was seeing during > my jack1/2 comparison tests. jack2 generally required one buffer size > step more to achieve the same xrun robustness as jack1. but i'm > generally able to use much lower latencies down to 64 (or 128 in the > jack2 case), unless i use jconvolver, which forces me to go to at least > 1024 so as not to max out the cpu. > > i didn't think too much about jack2's apparent overhead, since it has > the benefit of scaling to smp, which usually affects the > single-processor case (my box is a single-core amd64). > it would be interesting to see if torben's approach is able to deliver > the same latencies as jack1, while adding smp support. > > regards, > > jörn
Well "jack2's apparent overhead," is something new for me, and would require some deeper test/feedback to understand better. Moreover without more precise description of xruns occurrence (at what DSP CPU does it start to happen.. etc..) , what kind of setup (jack2 version, jack configuration, applications used....), it is again hard to understand/correct things. Stéphane _______________________________________________ Linux-audio-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
