Re: [LAU] Realtime Kernel

On Tue, Mar 18, 2008 at 11:41 AM, Arda Eden <ardaeden@email-addr-hidden> wrote:
> So what does a realtime kernel change ? Makes my latency 1 ms ?
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 18, 2008 at 8:38 PM, Arnold Krille <arnold@email-addr-hidden> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >
> > Am Dienstag, 18. März 2008 schrieb Mark Knecht:
> >
> > > On Tue, Mar 18, 2008 at 11:25 AM, Arda Eden <ardaeden@email-addr-hidden> wrote:
> > > > So is it really necessary to have a realtime kernel in order to use
> linux
> > > > audio applications without any latencies or xruns ?
> > > It is not possible to use ANY kernel with NO latencies. EVERY kernel
> > > has latencies. The question is how low do you want the latencies to
> > > be? If you can exist with 50mS or higher you might get away with a
> > > standard kernel. If you want to run with 1.2mS latency then you will
> > > absolutely have to have a real-time enabled kernel.
> >
> > Still it has to be noted that you can achieve 5ms latency without a
> > RT-kernel... Even with an el-cheapo builtin soundcard...
> >
> > Arnold

Absolutely. The most recent kernels are often quite good. However I
would say that the difference between a standard kernel running 5mS
and a RT kernel running 5mS is that the RT kernel is far more likely
to meet the 5mS requirement under heavy system loads while the
standard kernel may, at times, give a bit too much time to non-rt
threads and not get back to your audio thread as fast as someone might
want.

If you want the highest reliability means of meeting your RT
requirements all the time then use the RT kernel. If you are just
doing home recording and can accept an occasional xrun (i.e. - a
glitch in the recorded data) then stick with the standard kernel for
as long as it works for you.

Just my view,
Mark
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user@email-addr-hidden
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-user
Received on Wed Mar 19 00:15:07 2008