[LAD] Re: Status of Pipewire

On 2/9/23 08:31, Bengt Gördén wrote:
> On 2023-02-08 18:04, Will Godfrey wrote:
>> Quite honestly, the more I see, the more this looks like a train wreck!
> 
> On 2023-02-08 18:06, Rui Nuno Capela wrote:
>> for instance, and for crying out loud, pipewire is simply a disaster 
>> under a PREEMPT_RT kernel, while jack excels with flying colors :)
> 
> 
> You are probably both right, I don't know but I would like to know a 
> little more how you came to this conclusion.
> 

been testing it a lot, over every kernel-rt patch and pipewire release, 
currently on 6.2-rc7-rt1 and pipewire 0.3.65.

pipewire's scheduling is allegedly based on s/w timers and not on h/w 
irqs like jack/alsa; it's just more prone to xruns  when under a 
preempt_rt kernel and buffer-sizes (or quantum) lower than 1024 
frames/period.

overall, vanilla preempt aka low-latency kernels, seem to work better in 
this regard;

byee
-- 
rncbc aka. Rui Nuno Capela
[email protected]
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-dev mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]