The different realtime kernels

[Brian David]

On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 2:13 PM, Jeremy Jongepier <jeremy at autostatic.com>wrote:

> On 09/30/2010 08:40 PM, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
>
> Hello Ralf,
>
> It's not pointless.
> A lot of stuff from the patch-set has been integrated in the vanilla
> kernel already throughout the years. It is perfectly possible to run an
> audio production PC without a real-time kernel these days.
> I wouldn't need a real-time kernel if the FireWire controller in my
> notebook for instance would sit on its own IRQ. But no, it shares its
> IRQ with a dozen of other devices so I really need a real-time kernel to
> prioritize my FireWire IRQ thread. If it wasn't for that I would be
> perfectly happy with -lowlatency.
>
> Best,
>
> Jeremy
>
>
I'll second this.  I have two computers, a desktop and a laptop.  The
desktop is absolutely an excellent DAW using just the generic kernel, and
works even better with -lowlatency.  However, my laptop is basically
unusable without -rt.  The solution that Scott has suggested is perfect for
a user like me.  And, I think as long as the documentation is thorough and
easily accessible, it could work for most everyone else.

So, focusing on -lowlatency is not pointless.

-- 
-Brian David
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-studio-users/attachments/20101001/793a343b/attachment.htm