The point is that the newest kernel versions are not available in rt flavour (the latest is 2.6.31-11 and my experiences were not good with it). This is first time i heard about the lowlatency flavour, but it's not in my Ubuntu repos. So i'm afraid, if i want a new rt kernel (for 64-bit...), i'll have to use a ppa or build my own.
Andras 2010/6/30 Pedro Lopes <[email protected]> > What? > > Of course not. Its a pacth - no compiling needed. But be sure to keep a > generic kernel at the boot (just use grub to preserve a boot without rt, I > never had problems and use the same rt kernel for 1 year, but safety first > =P) > Real time (-rt) and Low latency (-lowlatency) kernels > > You may want to install the -lowlatency kernel, you can simply do: > > sudo apt-get install linux-lowlatency linux-headers-lowlatency > > If you still experience Xruns or you have a firewire sound card supported > by the FFADO project, you may want to install the -rt kernel: > > sudo apt-get install linux-rt linux-headers-rt > > > > 2010/6/30 András Murányi <[email protected]> > > Buh, it seems then i'll need to get a kernel from a PPA or compile it >> myself. A bit afraid of it, honestly. >> Thanks for the explanation! >> >> Andras >> >> >> On Sat, Jun 26, 2010 at 12:50 PM, Ricardo Lameiro < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >>> well, AFAIK, the "RT" Kernel is a generic kernel that is modified by a >>> special patch, that is made by Ingo Molnár. This patch gives the kernel the >>> ability to have a behavior that allows the assignment of time frames and >>> allocations to compute "rt" flagged tasks. Maybe this could be translated to >>> the scheduler.In the other hand, the preemptive kernel, its a normal Generic >>> kernel, that its compiled with different options. At compile time, the >>> configuration of the scheduler and company are configured more aggressively >>> to give a better response to the "rt" flagged apps. >>> >>> As my opinion, that is worth nothing...., the preemptive kernels are >>> comming into a very good level, since the main tree ot the generic kernel, >>> has absorbing parts of Ingo's patches. But, still, the RT kernel is way more >>> accurate on the scheduling etc. problem is that, RT kernels are in nature >>> more Power hungry, and by the nature of its working, they could hang easily >>> a computer, keeping only processing an high prio task. >>> >>> If I said something wrong, please correct me, I have looked at this stuff >>> since a year to try to understand it better, so if someone can explain it >>> better, please do. >>> >>> Ricardo Lameiro >>> >>> >>> >>> 2010/6/26 Andre "Osku" Schmidt <[email protected]> >>> >>> On Fri, 2010-06-25 at 22:17 +0200, András Murányi wrote: >>>> > Hello people, >>>> > >>>> > does anyone know what is the real difference between an 'rt' and a >>>> > 'preempt' kernel in linux? >>>> >>>> dunno, but here's a pretty interesting talk about real-time kernel >>>> >>>> http://lac.linuxaudio.org/2010/recordings/day2_1045_How_the_Real_Time_Kernel_Helps_Audio_and_Video_Applications.ogv >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>
_______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
