On Thu, February 14, 2013 11:09 am, Gene Heskett wrote:
> On Thursday 14 February 2013 13:35:26 Ralf Mardorf did opine:
>
>> On Thu, 2013-02-14 at 12:06 -0500, Gene Heskett wrote:
>> > 5 microsecond base thread jitter in its timing
>>
>> I agree that the nvidia driver could cause issues, but 5 ms jitter? This
>> perhaps is an issue for the RTAI, but I guess not for the audio RT
>> kernels.
>>
> Possibly not. What I am pointing out is that unlike all the fussing about
> it, xruns and all, and invoking all sorts of black magic speels to control
> it, working virtually blind, on LAU/LAD, we were forced to write test
> utilities that quantified the results in an easy to understand format.
> The
> net result being that we have a pretty good idea of the causes of the
> failures when the figures do blow up.
>
> Certain motherboards are pure junk, and a few are truly outstanding given
> their relatively meager specs on the box they ship in. The intel Atom
> dual
> core boards being a case in point. The now almost out of the pipeline
> D525MW board, with a gig of ram and onboard intel video being an excellent
> example, turning in results consistently under 7 microseconds for a
> base_thread jitter when running the base IO thread at a 25 microsecond
Have you tested hyperthreading enabled or not? I was quite surprised at
the difference on my old P4 as I was able to run my Audio IF at half the
latency (32frames instead of 64) with hyperthreading disabled. I have yet
to try my atom based netbook this way. I guess linux thinks they are two
cores and so is not picky about what it pairs with rt thread, which can
end up waiting for CPU time.
-- Len Ovens www.OvenWerks.net _______________________________________________ Linux-audio-user mailing list Linux-audio-user@email-addr-hidden http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-userReceived on Fri Feb 15 08:15:02 2013
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Fri Feb 15 2013 - 08:15:02 EET