Abramo wrote: > That apart, my current conclusion is that multiprocess approach is > definitely interesting and we need to design an architecture that works > fine with both approaches. Period. Abramo, I'm wondering about something. Maybe you've told us this before, but if so, I've skimmed over it. Can you tell us, in 200 words or less, why you feel that a multiprocess approach is so vital to support? That is, what do you want to do that would require it, and would not be possible with the single process (minimized/no IPC or context switching) approach? I may be developing my own reasons, but I want to hear yours first. :) - Jay Ts [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Re: [linux-audio-dev] Re: costs of IPC Abramo Bagnara
- Re: [linux-audio-dev] Re: costs of IPC Steve Harris
- Re: [linux-audio-dev] Re: costs of IPC Abramo Bagnara
- Re: [linux-audio-dev] Re: costs of IPC Steve Harris
- Re: [linux-audio-dev] Re: costs of IPC J�rn Nettingsmeier
- Re: [linux-audio-dev] Re: costs of IPC Scott McNab
- Re: [linux-audio-dev] Re: costs of IPC Karl MacMillan
- Re: [linux-audio-dev] Re: costs of IPC Steve Harris
- Re: [linux-audio-dev] Re: costs of IPC Abramo Bagnara
- Re: [linux-audio-dev] Re: costs of IPC Steve Harris
- Re: [linux-audio-dev] Re: costs of IPC Jay Ts
- Re: [linux-audio-dev] Re: costs of IPC Abramo Bagnara
- Re: [linux-audio-dev] Re: costs of IPC Steve Harris
- Re: [linux-audio-dev] Re: costs of IPC Jay Ts
- Re: [linux-audio-dev] Re: costs of IPC Abramo Bagnara
- Re: [linux-audio-dev] Re: costs of IPC Jay Ts
- Re: [linux-audio-dev] Re: costs of IPC S�bastien M�trot
- Re: [linux-audio-dev] Re: costs of IPC Steve Harris
- Re: [linux-audio-dev] Re: costs of IPC Abramo Bagnara
- Re: [linux-audio-dev] Re: costs of IPC Paul Davis
- [linux-audio-dev] Performance and Elegance? (Was: High ... Jay Ts
