ailomaa at warpmail.net
Tue May 8 18:27:20 UTC 2012
On 05/08/2012 08:02 PM, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> On Tue, 2012-05-08 at 19:43 +0200, Kaj Ailomaa wrote:
>> On 05/08/2012 07:29 PM, Kaj Ailomaa wrote:
>>> On 05/08/2012 05:37 PM, Scott Lavender wrote:
>>>> Hello everyone,
>>>> There are a few interesting developments that should be shared.
>>>> Firstly, there are discussions about moving the -lowlatency kernel
>>>> maintenance into the kernel team as it was pointed out that the patch is
>>>> "something like a two line" patch. I don't actually know how long our
>>>> patch is. And it seems disproportionate to have to rebuild a new kernel
>>>> each time of a security update for such a patch. It was suggested that
>>>> this might become a build option for an existing kernel package
>>>> by UKT.
>>> Great news about the kernel.
>>> In fact, another addition to linux confifuration options have made it
>>> possible to add threadirqs as a default boot option to the kernel
>>> without the need to edit the actual code (currently threadirqs option by
>>> default is made possible by a patch to the code):
>> So, if I'm not missing something, this would mean there will be no patch
>> required. Only a different config.
> I've got no time to read the whole thread, since I need to repair my
> mixer. However, for a full preempt non-rt kernel there is no patch
> required. It only depends to the config of a vanilla kernel.
There is a patch that enables threadirqs by default, but as I mentioned
above, that patch is no longer required.
What do mean by a "full" preempt non-rt kernel?
> Regarding to the CONFIG options in the previous post, there are some
> CONFIG options missing, but those are already set for e.g. the
> lowlatency kernel for Ubuntu Studio precise.
More information about the Ubuntu-Studio-devel