Re: [proaudio] trouble emerging museseq |
[ Thread Index |
Date Index
| More lists.tuxfamily.org/proaudio Archives
]
First of all, thanks for a very detailed and informative reply.
On Thursday 18 May 2006 02:44 Dominique Michel was like:
> RT-kernel are very sensitive to bad hardware configuration. IRQ can be
> a big source of problem. You must be sure at you don't share some IRQ.
> # cat /proc/interrupts
>The most important is the sound and video.
Here are my interrupts at the moment (the 2 cpus are actually a single
hyperthreaded P4):
CPU0 CPU1
0: 111983 0 IO-APIC-edge timer
1: 779 0 IO-APIC-edge i8042
8: 2 0 IO-APIC-edge rtc
9: 1 0 IO-APIC-level acpi
12: 19742 0 IO-APIC-edge i8042
14: 18008 0 IO-APIC-edge ide0
15: 622 0 IO-APIC-edge ide1
16: 24166 0 IO-APIC-level SysKonnect SK-98xx, ohci1394
17: 0 0 IO-APIC-level uhci_hcd:usb4
18: 81 0 IO-APIC-level ehci_hcd:usb1
19: 26052 0 IO-APIC-level uhci_hcd:usb2, uhci_hcd:usb5, \
fglrx
20: 0 0 IO-APIC-level uhci_hcd:usb3
21: 0 0 IO-APIC-level EMU10K1
22: 0 0 IO-APIC-level Intel ICH5
NMI: 0 0
LOC: 111921 111899
ERR: 0
MIS: 0
Obviously interrupt 19 is problematic because of the video driver (and it
might explain some other odd behaviour as well). Should I be worried about
any of the other interrupts?
And is changing them simply a matter of cmos settings, or do I need to do
something in Linux?
> But in your case, I think at 512 MB RAM is too little to do serious audio
> work. It is what was in my box, and I added 1GB and many problems as
> intermitant noises was gone. I recommand for an audio workstation to have
> the same hardware as a graphic station, high tech motherboard, huge ram
> memory, but with simpler graphic card (less noise footprint), better sound
> card (it is what we want) and better hdd system (a must for multitrack
> recording).
I too have 512MB ram, but I rarely see swap usage go above zero in Gnome
System Monitor. Do you still think that RAM would be an issue for me too?
> You must be sure at jack is using tmpfs (USE jack-tmpfs). Check in fstab at
> you have: none /dev/shm tmpfs nodev,nosuid,noexec 0
> 0 Otherwise, jackd will use the hdd to do its work, and it can be a hudge
> amount of data. tmpfs will use RAM but the amount of data will remain the
> same, it will work faster and with less noise.
Mine reads:
none /dev/shm tmpfs defaults 0 0
Do I need to explicitly state nodev,nosuid,noexec?
All the best
Robert
--
Robert Persson
ireneshusband@xxxxxxxxxxx
YahooMessenger:ireneshusband
Conspiracy Bears:
Once upon a time there were lots of conspiracy bears...