Re: [vdr] [PATCH] limit streamdev client's ringbuffer timeouts to more sane values

2007-04-07 Thread Stone
Is this patch for streamdev a direct result from selecting the new Tickless System (Dynamic Ticks) option in kernel 2.6.21? If yes, then CONFIG_HIGH_RES_TIMERS High Resolution Timer Support. Whether NO_HZ makes a difference I'm not sure, i ran into this w/ both options on. (launching nice

Re: [vdr] [PATCH] limit streamdev client's ringbuffer timeouts to more sane values

2007-04-06 Thread Artur Skawina
Stone wrote: On 4/5/07, *Artur Skawina* [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: With the high-res timers in kernel 2.6.21+ usleep(1) is no longer treated as usleep(1) and the streamdev client is almost unusable; it uses most of the cpu and causes hundreds

Re: [vdr] [PATCH] limit streamdev client's ringbuffer timeouts to more sane values

2007-04-06 Thread Stone
sure, just changing it to 'usleep(1)' works too. Is there a reason to avoid the ringbuffer infrastructure? No reason in particular, I just wanted to test which one worked best with performance. Thanks for the patch. :) ___ vdr mailing list

Re: [vdr] [PATCH] limit streamdev client's ringbuffer timeouts to more sane values

2007-04-06 Thread Artur Skawina
Stone wrote: sure, just changing it to 'usleep(1)' works too. Is there a reason to avoid the ringbuffer infrastructure? No reason in particular, I just wanted to test which one worked best with performance. Thanks for the patch. :) I tried the 1us - (1000|1)us sleep

Re: [vdr] [PATCH] limit streamdev client's ringbuffer timeouts to more sane values

2007-04-06 Thread Stone
I tried the 1us - (1000|1)us sleep approach first, before using the ringbuffer timeouts -- saw no noticeable difference wrt performance. 10ms timeouts seemed to be enough (it's the resolution of a HZ==100 kernel) and gave similar interrupt and cs numbers as w/ low-res timers. Is this

Re: [vdr] [PATCH] limit streamdev client's ringbuffer timeouts to more sane values

2007-04-05 Thread Stone
On 4/5/07, Artur Skawina [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Well, the streamdev-client reads data from a ringbuffer and when there isn't anything to read it tries to sleep for 1us and loops. This wasn't a problem when the timer resolution was in the 1000..1us range (1000..100Hz); the usleep(1) call