Re: [GnomeMeeting-devel-list] GnomeMeeting on 2.6
- From: Johnny Strom <jonny strom netikka fi>
- To: Johnny Strom <jonny strom netikka fi>, gnomemeeting-devel-list gnome org
- Subject: Re: [GnomeMeeting-devel-list] GnomeMeeting on 2.6
- Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2004 13:31:23 +0200
Now I did a test with P_HAS_SEMAPHORES = 1 it is the same as with 0,
so the sound is bad with seti running but it seems to be a littla better
than when P_HAS_SEMAPHORES was 0. If I run seti with nice level 19 then
it is ok. So now with 2.6.1 kernel and P_HAS_SEMAPHORES = 1 it the best
But still it is not like it was in the 2.4 kernel.
It seems like that GM is punished bye the schedular or something,
the gui becomes reel slow, note that if I try to start other
applications so are the gui fast on the other applications.
And with seti and GM running so is the load getting high:
load average: 6,75, 3,61, 3,99
Could it be becous that GM dose a lot of I/O all the time?
I think there are stuff in the kernel now that looks at that.
Johnny Strom wrote:
Now I am testing this with David Quental, so if I am compiling
at the samt time as GM is running then I get a lot of cuts in the sound
with P_HAS_SEMAPHORES = 0. This is with 2.6.1 kernel.
!Note that without any cpu intensive processes like seti or
compilation so is the sound fine.
I will send an other mail in some minutes where I put
P_HAS_SEMAPHORES = 1 and repport what happens.
Damien Sandras wrote:
Who is using the 2.6 kernel and is ready to test the latest changes with
Craig, given the fact that many packagers will compile on 2.4, what is
I tried on the 2.4 kernel to force the P_HAS_SEMAPHORES to 0 and I have a
bad sound quality when compiling, which I had not with P_HAS_SEMAPHORES
set to 1.
The problem becomes complex. Having a bad sound quality is not
problematic. What was problematic on 2.6 was to have people having bad
sound quality as soon as they were moving a window.
What are your comments?
Gnomemeeting-devel-list mailing list
Gnomemeeting-devel-list gnome org
] [Thread Prev