Hello people,
does anyone know what is the real difference between an 'rt' and a 'preempt' kernel in linux? I noticed that the newest rt is not always available any more for my arch, whilst this preempt thing has appeared in the repo... Is pdextended -rt supposed to like my preempt kernel?
Thanks, Andras
On Fri, 2010-06-25 at 22:17 +0200, András Murányi wrote:
Hello people,
does anyone know what is the real difference between an 'rt' and a 'preempt' kernel in linux?
dunno, but here's a pretty interesting talk about real-time kernel http://lac.linuxaudio.org/2010/recordings/day2_1045_How_the_Real_Time_Kernel...
well, AFAIK, the "RT" Kernel is a generic kernel that is modified by a special patch, that is made by Ingo Molnár. This patch gives the kernel the ability to have a behavior that allows the assignment of time frames and allocations to compute "rt" flagged tasks. Maybe this could be translated to the scheduler.In the other hand, the preemptive kernel, its a normal Generic kernel, that its compiled with different options. At compile time, the configuration of the scheduler and company are configured more aggressively to give a better response to the "rt" flagged apps.
As my opinion, that is worth nothing...., the preemptive kernels are comming into a very good level, since the main tree ot the generic kernel, has absorbing parts of Ingo's patches. But, still, the RT kernel is way more accurate on the scheduling etc. problem is that, RT kernels are in nature more Power hungry, and by the nature of its working, they could hang easily a computer, keeping only processing an high prio task.
If I said something wrong, please correct me, I have looked at this stuff since a year to try to understand it better, so if someone can explain it better, please do.
Ricardo Lameiro
2010/6/26 Andre "Osku" Schmidt andre.osku.schmidt@osku.de
On Fri, 2010-06-25 at 22:17 +0200, András Murányi wrote:
Hello people,
does anyone know what is the real difference between an 'rt' and a 'preempt' kernel in linux?
dunno, but here's a pretty interesting talk about real-time kernel
http://lac.linuxaudio.org/2010/recordings/day2_1045_How_the_Real_Time_Kernel...
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
hello,
is pd a low level programming language?
and what is with text-based environments like supercollider?
best,
steff
_________________________________________________________________
http://redirect.gimas.net/?n=M1006xHMTL6
Künftig E-Mails ohne Werbung – Nutzen Sie Hotmail auch geschäftlich.
Hmm, as far as I know, when we talk about low level programming language,usually it's about assembly language language that kinda talks directly to the computer's hardware.
I think pd and supercollider is not a low level programming langu,because they represent a higher level of the computer's behavior. Correct me if I'm wrong :)
Regards,
Adityo Sent from my BlackBerry® smartphone from Sinyal Bagus XL, Nyambung Teruuusss...!
-----Original Message----- From: steffen scholl st.scholl@live.de Sender: pd-list-bounces@iem.at Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2010 10:37:47 To: ricardolameiro@gmail.com; andre.osku.schmidt@osku.de Cc: pd-list@iem.at Subject: [PD] low-level programming languageß
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
You´re right. SuperCollider is a very high-level and object-oriented programming language. Also very expressive and has all tha characteristics of a object-oriented language (inheritance, polymorphism, classes etc). Low-level programming language, also OOP, would be C++. PD is no object-oriented in any sense BTW. There is also a discussion on sc-list about this question.
2010/6/30 quietdidit@gmail.com:
Hmm, as far as I know, when we talk about low level programming language,usually it's about assembly language language that kinda talks directly to the computer's hardware.
I think pd and supercollider is not a low level programming langu,because they represent a higher level of the computer's behavior. Correct me if I'm wrong :)
On Wed, 30 Jun 2010, Bernardo Barros wrote:
You´re right. SuperCollider is a very high-level and object-oriented programming language. Also very expressive and has all tha characteristics of a object-oriented language (inheritance, polymorphism, classes etc). Low-level programming language, also OOP, would be C++.
To fit any sensible definitions of low and high, C++ would have to be classified in multi-level programming languages, which is sort of C++'s own category, as it allows you to do things you can't even directly do by gluing pieces of code of normal low-level languages and normal high-level languages together.
PD is no object-oriented in any sense BTW.
I have to consider PD either object-oriented or nearly-object-oriented, but it's also sufficiently crippled to make lower one's expectations about what an object-oriented language should offer. But then I don't think that object-oriented as a language category makes that much sense compared to looking at the main features of it such as the self-context, messages, methods, classes, objects, method-lookup, inheritance, polymorphism. In the end, it's only really lacking inheritance. But the trouble comes from how you can create and delete objects, how you can send to them, and then, because of that, what the objects look like they are made for, in relationship with atoms. Because of that, pd/max class design is quite inside-out compared to anything (else) called object-oriented.
If it helps you, you could use a separate word for pd's "object-oriented", such as calling it not at all "object-oriented", but I'd believe that the reality is more subtle than that. For example, I need a category in which I put the early years of Java, in a way that expresses that their conception of polymorphism was so dysfunctional that it was only polymorphic on paper :
MyLeafClassSaidTwice result = (MyLeafClassSaidTwice) ((MyContainerClassSaidExplicitlyWhenIShouldntNeedTo) bucket.getElement(new IntegerWrapperKludge(n))).getElement(m);
In any case, SC has a much deeper object-oriented design than Pd for sure... But I'm still not really aware of much of the details, because I don't have much of an incentive to try SC at this point (except to translate some SC snippets into Pd patches and/or externals). From that distance, though, I have a lot more esteem for SC than for Java.
_ _ __ ___ _____ ________ _____________ _____________________ ... | Mathieu Bouchard, Montréal, Québec. téléphone: +1.514.383.3801
Buh, it seems then i'll need to get a kernel from a PPA or compile it myself. A bit afraid of it, honestly. Thanks for the explanation!
Andras
On Sat, Jun 26, 2010 at 12:50 PM, Ricardo Lameiro ricardolameiro@gmail.comwrote:
well, AFAIK, the "RT" Kernel is a generic kernel that is modified by a special patch, that is made by Ingo Molnár. This patch gives the kernel the ability to have a behavior that allows the assignment of time frames and allocations to compute "rt" flagged tasks. Maybe this could be translated to the scheduler.In the other hand, the preemptive kernel, its a normal Generic kernel, that its compiled with different options. At compile time, the configuration of the scheduler and company are configured more aggressively to give a better response to the "rt" flagged apps.
As my opinion, that is worth nothing...., the preemptive kernels are comming into a very good level, since the main tree ot the generic kernel, has absorbing parts of Ingo's patches. But, still, the RT kernel is way more accurate on the scheduling etc. problem is that, RT kernels are in nature more Power hungry, and by the nature of its working, they could hang easily a computer, keeping only processing an high prio task.
If I said something wrong, please correct me, I have looked at this stuff since a year to try to understand it better, so if someone can explain it better, please do.
Ricardo Lameiro
2010/6/26 Andre "Osku" Schmidt andre.osku.schmidt@osku.de
On Fri, 2010-06-25 at 22:17 +0200, András Murányi wrote:
Hello people,
does anyone know what is the real difference between an 'rt' and a 'preempt' kernel in linux?
dunno, but here's a pretty interesting talk about real-time kernel
http://lac.linuxaudio.org/2010/recordings/day2_1045_How_the_Real_Time_Kernel...
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
-- Fagote / Contrafagote Bassoon / Contra-bassoon http://myspace.com/ricardolameiro
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
What?
Of course not. Its a pacth - no compiling needed. But be sure to keep a generic kernel at the boot (just use grub to preserve a boot without rt, I never had problems and use the same rt kernel for 1 year, but safety first =P) Real time (-rt) and Low latency (-lowlatency) kernels
You may want to install the -lowlatency kernel, you can simply do:
sudo apt-get install linux-lowlatency linux-headers-lowlatency
If you still experience Xruns or you have a firewire sound card supported by the FFADO project, you may want to install the -rt kernel:
sudo apt-get install linux-rt linux-headers-rt
2010/6/30 András Murányi muranyia@gmail.com
Buh, it seems then i'll need to get a kernel from a PPA or compile it myself. A bit afraid of it, honestly. Thanks for the explanation!
Andras
On Sat, Jun 26, 2010 at 12:50 PM, Ricardo Lameiro < ricardolameiro@gmail.com> wrote:
well, AFAIK, the "RT" Kernel is a generic kernel that is modified by a special patch, that is made by Ingo Molnár. This patch gives the kernel the ability to have a behavior that allows the assignment of time frames and allocations to compute "rt" flagged tasks. Maybe this could be translated to the scheduler.In the other hand, the preemptive kernel, its a normal Generic kernel, that its compiled with different options. At compile time, the configuration of the scheduler and company are configured more aggressively to give a better response to the "rt" flagged apps.
As my opinion, that is worth nothing...., the preemptive kernels are comming into a very good level, since the main tree ot the generic kernel, has absorbing parts of Ingo's patches. But, still, the RT kernel is way more accurate on the scheduling etc. problem is that, RT kernels are in nature more Power hungry, and by the nature of its working, they could hang easily a computer, keeping only processing an high prio task.
If I said something wrong, please correct me, I have looked at this stuff since a year to try to understand it better, so if someone can explain it better, please do.
Ricardo Lameiro
2010/6/26 Andre "Osku" Schmidt andre.osku.schmidt@osku.de
On Fri, 2010-06-25 at 22:17 +0200, András Murányi wrote:
Hello people,
does anyone know what is the real difference between an 'rt' and a 'preempt' kernel in linux?
dunno, but here's a pretty interesting talk about real-time kernel
http://lac.linuxaudio.org/2010/recordings/day2_1045_How_the_Real_Time_Kernel...
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
-- Fagote / Contrafagote Bassoon / Contra-bassoon http://myspace.com/ricardolameiro
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
The point is that the newest kernel versions are not available in rt flavour (the latest is 2.6.31-11 and my experiences were not good with it). This is first time i heard about the lowlatency flavour, but it's not in my Ubuntu repos. So i'm afraid, if i want a new rt kernel (for 64-bit...), i'll have to use a ppa or build my own.
Andras
2010/6/30 Pedro Lopes pedro.lopes@ist.utl.pt
What?
Of course not. Its a pacth - no compiling needed. But be sure to keep a generic kernel at the boot (just use grub to preserve a boot without rt, I never had problems and use the same rt kernel for 1 year, but safety first =P) Real time (-rt) and Low latency (-lowlatency) kernels
You may want to install the -lowlatency kernel, you can simply do:
sudo apt-get install linux-lowlatency linux-headers-lowlatency
If you still experience Xruns or you have a firewire sound card supported by the FFADO project, you may want to install the -rt kernel:
sudo apt-get install linux-rt linux-headers-rt
2010/6/30 András Murányi muranyia@gmail.com
Buh, it seems then i'll need to get a kernel from a PPA or compile it
myself. A bit afraid of it, honestly. Thanks for the explanation!
Andras
On Sat, Jun 26, 2010 at 12:50 PM, Ricardo Lameiro < ricardolameiro@gmail.com> wrote:
well, AFAIK, the "RT" Kernel is a generic kernel that is modified by a special patch, that is made by Ingo Molnár. This patch gives the kernel the ability to have a behavior that allows the assignment of time frames and allocations to compute "rt" flagged tasks. Maybe this could be translated to the scheduler.In the other hand, the preemptive kernel, its a normal Generic kernel, that its compiled with different options. At compile time, the configuration of the scheduler and company are configured more aggressively to give a better response to the "rt" flagged apps.
As my opinion, that is worth nothing...., the preemptive kernels are comming into a very good level, since the main tree ot the generic kernel, has absorbing parts of Ingo's patches. But, still, the RT kernel is way more accurate on the scheduling etc. problem is that, RT kernels are in nature more Power hungry, and by the nature of its working, they could hang easily a computer, keeping only processing an high prio task.
If I said something wrong, please correct me, I have looked at this stuff since a year to try to understand it better, so if someone can explain it better, please do.
Ricardo Lameiro
2010/6/26 Andre "Osku" Schmidt andre.osku.schmidt@osku.de
On Fri, 2010-06-25 at 22:17 +0200, András Murányi wrote:
Hello people,
does anyone know what is the real difference between an 'rt' and a 'preempt' kernel in linux?
dunno, but here's a pretty interesting talk about real-time kernel
http://lac.linuxaudio.org/2010/recordings/day2_1045_How_the_Real_Time_Kernel...
UbuntuStudio is an official rt kernel with 64 bits. You do not need to compile your own. rt kernels are not at the same stage as the generic, I never noticed any issue or problem with rts. But its your call.
I have two rt's, my first was Ubuntu Studio 64 bits, and later I pacthed my Ubuntu Karmic 32 bits to be rt. It also stores all the other kernels, you don't loose the generic ones and you can boot from them anytime, grub adds every kernel image to the boot (you'll have the rt and the generic side by side at boot). Don't worry.
This is my kernel version, on the 32 bits: pedro@arkana:~$ uname -a Linux arkana 2.6.31-9-rt #152-Ubuntu SMP PREEMPT RT Thu Oct 15 05:01:14 UTC 2009 i686 GNU/Linux
2010/6/30 András Murányi muranyia@gmail.com
The point is that the newest kernel versions are not available in rt flavour (the latest is 2.6.31-11 and my experiences were not good with it). This is first time i heard about the lowlatency flavour, but it's not in my Ubuntu repos. So i'm afraid, if i want a new rt kernel (for 64-bit...), i'll have to use a ppa or build my own.
Andras
2010/6/30 Pedro Lopes pedro.lopes@ist.utl.pt
What?
Of course not. Its a pacth - no compiling needed. But be sure to keep a generic kernel at the boot (just use grub to preserve a boot without rt, I never had problems and use the same rt kernel for 1 year, but safety first =P) Real time (-rt) and Low latency (-lowlatency) kernels
You may want to install the -lowlatency kernel, you can simply do:
sudo apt-get install linux-lowlatency linux-headers-lowlatency
If you still experience Xruns or you have a firewire sound card supported by the FFADO project, you may want to install the -rt kernel:
sudo apt-get install linux-rt linux-headers-rt
2010/6/30 András Murányi muranyia@gmail.com
Buh, it seems then i'll need to get a kernel from a PPA or compile it
myself. A bit afraid of it, honestly. Thanks for the explanation!
Andras
On Sat, Jun 26, 2010 at 12:50 PM, Ricardo Lameiro < ricardolameiro@gmail.com> wrote:
well, AFAIK, the "RT" Kernel is a generic kernel that is modified by a special patch, that is made by Ingo Molnár. This patch gives the kernel the ability to have a behavior that allows the assignment of time frames and allocations to compute "rt" flagged tasks. Maybe this could be translated to the scheduler.In the other hand, the preemptive kernel, its a normal Generic kernel, that its compiled with different options. At compile time, the configuration of the scheduler and company are configured more aggressively to give a better response to the "rt" flagged apps.
As my opinion, that is worth nothing...., the preemptive kernels are comming into a very good level, since the main tree ot the generic kernel, has absorbing parts of Ingo's patches. But, still, the RT kernel is way more accurate on the scheduling etc. problem is that, RT kernels are in nature more Power hungry, and by the nature of its working, they could hang easily a computer, keeping only processing an high prio task.
If I said something wrong, please correct me, I have looked at this stuff since a year to try to understand it better, so if someone can explain it better, please do.
Ricardo Lameiro
2010/6/26 Andre "Osku" Schmidt andre.osku.schmidt@osku.de
On Fri, 2010-06-25 at 22:17 +0200, András Murányi wrote:
Hello people,
does anyone know what is the real difference between an 'rt' and a 'preempt' kernel in linux?
dunno, but here's a pretty interesting talk about real-time kernel
http://lac.linuxaudio.org/2010/recordings/day2_1045_How_the_Real_Time_Kernel...
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
-
Andre "Osku" Schmidt -
András Murányi -
Bernardo Barros -
Mathieu Bouchard -
Pedro Lopes -
quietdidit＠gmail.com -
Ricardo Lameiro -
steffen scholl