Watchdog for POSIX RT (Linux)?
Winfried Ritsch
ritsch at iem.mhsg.ac.at
Thu Mar 12 12:39:09 CET 1998
Larry Troxler writes:
> Miller Puckette wrote:
> >
> > Larry's idea sounds good. On SGIs I was planning to set a virtual alarm and
> > measure whether the CPU had eaten more than 90% of the processor, in which
> > case it would automatically sleep for 10 msec every 100 msec or so. But
> > I don't know how this will work out under NT. The good thing is it doesn't
> > use threads at all so should be easy to port among unixes at least, if we're
> > given that ALARM signals can reach high-priority processes. Is that true
> > of Linux???
> >
I think much more simpler would be do to the own watchdogging:
- the point is if pd has a higher priority than pd-gui then you can
use pd-gui to do the setting of a flag and pd to watching this, so
- if pd sees pd-gui "out of sync" then he reduces the calculationpower
by maybe:
- first reducing sending TCL/Tk stuff and as a
- second thing dropping schedules slices (DACs slips)... and as a
- third stopping pd-process.
mfg winfried ritsch
--- DI Winfried Ritsch - ritsch at iem.mhsg.ac.at ---
INSTITUT FUER ELEKTRONISCHE MUSIK-
University of Music and Dramatic Art
Tel. ++43-316-389-7210, Fax.++43-316-389-7008
More information about the Pd-list
mailing list