Subject: Re: [linux-audio-user] voluntary-preempt-2.6.9-rc3-mm3-xxx
From: Florian Schmidt (mista.tapas_AT_gmx.net)
Date: Mon Oct 11 2004 - 17:51:46 EEST
On Mon, 11 Oct 2004 06:52:50 -0700
Mark Knecht <markknecht_AT_gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, 10 Oct 2004 19:56:35 -0600, thewade <pdman_AT_aproximation.org> wrote:
> > As Lee Revell has pointed out, there are bugs with
> > voluntary-preempt-2.6.9-rc3-mm2-S9 as I have posted them on this list.
>
> You - 2.6.9-rc3-mm2-S9 (some problems?)
> Me - 2.6.9-rc2-mm4-S7 (good on laptop for 3-4 days now)
> Me - Planetedge on desktop (HDSP driver won't allow -p less than 64)
> Lee - 2.6.9-xxx-xxx-T3 (seems happy)
> Florian - X.X.X-xxx-xxx-T3 (problems)
> Florian - X.X.X-xxx.xxx-T1 (stable)
>
> Nobody is really testing the same thing. (Much less the same code with
> different compile time options...) Different machines, different
> chipsets. Probably different sample rates, diffeent sound cards,
> different p and n settings. I think results are hard to compare.
This is the _current_ state of affairs. Of course Lee, me and others have
tested other versions of the VP kernels, too. I'd suggest reading through
the relevant lkml threads to see if someone reported problems with each
particular version.
One interesting thing i observed was that ingo decided to put VP ontop of mm
when it started to get really useful. But of course mm kernels themselfes
are experimental kernels, so when testing a newer VP kernel one actually is
kind of involuntarily used as a tester for experimental mm features, making
it even harder to suggest a "stable" VP kernel to anyone. Especially since
mm kernels often seem to be really really b0rk3n. Dunno if it's ever gonna
change again. Lee, you got more details on plans of getting VP into vanilla?
flo
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Mon Oct 11 2004 - 17:39:34 EEST