Subject: [linux-audio-dev] Re: Pragmatic comparison of approaches to audio engine
From: Abramo Bagnara (abramo_AT_alsa-project.org)
Date: Mon May 14 2001 - 17:08:16 EEST
> >Results are *very* interesting.
>
> I would be interested to see what you think of them.
I attach latest version of ctx.c with stack pollution and shared area
pollution.
My more or less obvious considerations follow:
- the cache has most dramatic effect
- context switch time has somewhat little impact (note that this have
theoretical greater effect on low end machine, but there to have many
components is not possible for other reasons)
- multi thread/multi process cannot share the stack and this bring to an
extra cache use (although this may be limited with a bit of care).
IMO all the efforts need to be directed to reduce cache footprint:
- to use shared library and to share all the shareable code is a
priority (one more argument for "one API")
- to share temporary areas
Fast resume:
1) Share everything
2) Keep it small
3) Buy more CPUs and use multiprocess model ;-)
About approaches: I think that the API need to be designed having in
mind both approaches. It have to be designed leaving the approach as an
implementation detail, I know that this may be more difficult but to
fail here means to prejudice near future possibilities.
-- Abramo Bagnara mailto:abramo_AT_alsa-project.orgOpera Unica Phone: +39.546.656023 Via Emilia Interna, 140 48014 Castel Bolognese (RA) - Italy
ALSA project http://www.alsa-project.org It sounds good!
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Mon May 14 2001 - 17:27:42 EEST