On Fri, 19.06.09 20:39, Chris Cannam (cannam@email-addr-hidden-day-breakfast.com) wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jun 19, 2009 at 7:13 PM, Lennart Poettering<mzynq@email-addr-hidden> wrote:
> > Questions?
>
> Is it safe to assume that the PulseAudio libraries will use this
> method to acquire real-time scheduling for the audio callback thread
> of any application that uses the PulseAudio callback API directly?
Uh. I thought about that. Not sure if we really should do that
though. In many cases, the app's IO callback might not really be that
well suited for execution in RT. And then it might end up being killed
by RLIMIT_RTTIME or so. Dunno. Maybe that would not even be a problemn
and we could just make all IO threads RT at prio 1 or so. I am a bit
afraid that such a thing might backfire and we fuck up the scheduling
for everyone else too.
I really don't know. Maybe just make it easily accessible would be a
good idea, but not enable by default. But OTOH RT is not a magic wand,
so I wouldn't want to create the illusion that just making a broken
app RT fixes all issues magically.
Lennart
-- Lennart Poettering Red Hat, Inc. lennart [at] poettering [dot] net http://0pointer.net/lennart/ GnuPG 0x1A015CC4 _______________________________________________ Linux-audio-dev mailing list Linux-audio-dev@email-addr-hidden http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-devReceived on Sat Jun 20 00:15:04 2009
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Sat Jun 20 2009 - 00:15:04 EEST