Or, SysRq is useful for users with hanging Linux systems, in case of unrecoverable system lockups:
Use with caution, don't try at home, yada yada.
Despite the other SysRq functions, these are enabled by default.
3/3 While the ability to run at nice priority -20 still requires root permission for the initial setup (or SYS_CAP_NICE), even that could *potentially* change with the introduction of a latency nice setting, if the kernel developers manage to implement unelevated latency re-nicing without opening up the gates for DOS attacks.
These developments are described in the LWN article 'The many faces of "latency nice"':
2/3 Not only is the risk of system lockups unwarranted to avoid audio drop outs, there is also no need for it to be taken.
Just prioritizing the audio rendering threads to run at nice level -20 is sufficient to prevent drop outs in low-latency setups, i.e. setups with <10ms round trip time. BTW, such setups require audio fragment sizes <= 128 samples (or "periods with <= 128 frames" in ALSA language).
1/3 On the topic of Linux low-latency audio setups…
Installing jackd (1 or 2) still requests "realtime priority" to minimize latency.
This project should really get its act together and stop demanding this kind of elevation from benign audiophile users.
Resistance is fruitful: 😀
CANN rejects sale of .org registry to for-profit investor group
@sir Can't answer that without multiple choice.
@linuzifer front-end or back-end inserter?
@julienxx See the #GNU coding standard, section "5.1 Formatting Your Source Code". Yes, grep-ability was one idea, but with C++ classes, grepping for function names starting in column 1 doesn't work as well as in C.
»Video: Wie wichtig Abstand halten ist, um andere nicht mit dem Coronavirus zu infizieren, zeigt ein faszinierendes Video.«
Most of us are undergoing a lot of stress right now. People under stress can be short-tempered and impatient and can lash out. Try to be patient, empathetic, sympathetic, and avoid causing more stress or irritate or antagonize.
Try to be extra clear in your own communication, and ask others to clarify if they're not unambiguous. Be explicit about your feelings and expectations.
If you make a mistake, apologize.
Apparently, g++-9.2.1 does *not* const-initialize a `static Class x;` with a constexpr ctor, *if* it also happens to have an uninitialized uint64_t array member. It does not generate a warning either, but surely triggers the "C++ Static Initialization Order Fiasco" at some inconvenient future point.
Well, not in the book I'm currently reading to my 5yr old daughter (it's German, from 2009).
@jwildeboer Yeah, reading Guardian atm, Reuters' still asleep... tzzz ;-)
@jwildeboer Where? Reuters still runs Irans denial...
DSP + UI developer on the Beast DAW, Free Software author + advocate, contributor to ALSA/GNOME/procps/LibreOffice/etc.
The social network of the future: No ads, no corporate surveillance, ethical design, and decentralization! Own your data with Mastodon!