For reference, here is the AstLinux kernel config for the ALIX: http://astlinux.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/astlinux/trunk/target/device/alix/linux.config?view=markup
We've got what I consider to be excellent support for the ALIX - most of the developers use them and they are very popular in the community. On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 11:00 AM, Anthony Minessale <anthony.miness...@gmail.com> wrote: > Did you do each thing alone too to tell the difference? > -hp alone, disable monotonic alone (i did not see you mention the disable > monotonic) > > as for your 4ms thing, yes we require high resolution timing, if we ask to > sleep 1000 microseconds that is what we need it to sleep for or at least as > close as possible, and the main reason that thread is never sleeping is > because you can't actually count on it to run every 1ms but you mostly can. > Hence the whole philosophy on only making 1 thread run hot all the time to > ensure that the rest don't have to repeat the same algorithm. We focus on > high end performance this was the point of your experimentation because we > will need to use a compile time defines and other logic to make it more > efficient on your platform, a platform which we are not using. I am curious > what would happen if you install Kristian's astlinux on one of your devices, > i think you should also compare the kernel versions. > > > What OS are you running anyway? > > Here are some more things to try (running plain trunk with no mods) do these > systematically each alone and all together with/without -hp or disable > monotonic etc to see what different combos create > > comment out this line (line 10) > #define DISABLE_1MS_COND > > rebuild, this tells it to run a conditional at 1ms in the same timer thread > which will make all the switch_cond_next share a 1ms conditional instead of > doing microsleeps > > next > > some kernels/devices work better using select(0) for sleep where others work > better using usleep. > comment out line 109 > apr_sleep(t); > > and try > usleep(t) > > also mac works better using nanosleep so you could try changing it so it > uses the code starting at 101 instead. > > > also your claim about JS should be investigated because I do not think it > should be the case. > but you may want to move this to a jira http://jira.freeswitch.org > > As for the asterisk comparison, > not sure how to answer you, that's your decision. > -- Kristian Kielhofner http://www.astlinux.org http://blog.krisk.org http://www.star2star.com http://www.submityoursip.com http://www.voalte.com _______________________________________________ FreeSWITCH-users mailing list FreeSWITCH-users@lists.freeswitch.org http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users UNSUBSCRIBE:http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users http://www.freeswitch.org