manjaro lowlatency kernel

wouldn't it be possible to publish a low latency kernel instead of linux-rt kernels?
it's about audio production and sometimes I have to use V-Box to convert some stuff ... with the linux-rt 5.x this was not possible so far.

a low latency kernel would be safer and easier to adapt from the standard kernel, just with the same tick rates as the ubuntu lowlatency kernel.

You could compile a custom kernel.

Kernels can be cloned from here:

Then modify the configuration as you wish, e.g the PREEMPT settings, update the checksum, compile and install it.

In your case I also would have a look into this guide:

https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Professional_audio

1 Like

the system is already optimized and was previously used with linux-rt, because of various problems i am now using the standard kernel ...
it would be nice to have an official low latency kernel for manjaro without compiling for hours on new releases

Obviously, there is not a high demand for that, so why are you not the one providing this for others instead of waiting for someone doing it for you? :stuck_out_tongue_winking_eye:

1 Like

a low latency kernel definitely improves the performance on KDE, why shouldn't it also be available for manjaro as in other distros?

Sounds like a great offer, do it. I sure others will appreciate your generosity.

2 Likes

From what I've read here, 1000Hz is causing issues (at least on real-time kernel) from time to time, so going with 300Hz is safer. For short period of time there was low latency kernel (RT) and it was running very good but for some reason it was converted back to 300 Hz. There is only one way in this situation which means, do it by your self and I doubt that will change sooner or later, so asking for it is pretty much waste of time imo.

Maybe my memory is failing me but every time when low latency kernel topic pop up there is only one type of answers for it. Good idea make it by yourself, here're links. Thank you, goodbye. Ok, maybe two, but second is 300 Hz is performing better (but this applies to RT).
So this can be part of issue here I guess (low demand for that).

1 Like

thanks guys, i'm looking for a quick installation process without losing time for compiling after a new release ..
e.g. can sources for the linux-vd (torvic9) kernels be integrated directly via mirrorlist?

i found that standard Manjaro kernel with rtirq/threadirqs performs better for running JACK than lowlatency kernel on Debian/Ubuntu - based on comparison of Manjaro XFCE; Ubuntu Studio and AVLinux (with lowlatency and liquorix kernel)

Trulan makes good Debian kernels for AVLinux and would be my 2nd choice for a good production distribution. But for my use, Manjaro has been reliable and fast for years and i can get important stuff (content) done and not much time on maintenance

1 Like

rtirq w/ threadirqs can not change the kernel tick rate from 300hz to 1000hz and it's just a workaround from the past where a low latency kernel was not yet available

I would love to see a low-latency Manjaro kernel too, but for different reasons.
Low latency kernels have a better responsiveness. They react faster on mouse clicks and keystrokes if a PC is busy. This is very helpful on old and/or slow hardware.

I have tested xanmod and liquorix kernels from the AUR. They both come with MuQSS task scheduler. This helps my laptop to not freeze for minutes while I am doing a fio hard disc benchmark. I can not prevent that freeze witht the stock Manjaro kernels.

I would love to use a Manjaro kernel with either one of the alternative task schedulers: MuQSS, PDS or BMQ. This would be more save for me compared to running arch or debian focused kernels from AUR.

i do not see how threadirqs relates to tick rate. threadirqs has been around for a while but realtimeconfigquickscan only added a check for it earlier this year - feature request
(IMO this gives a Manjaro kernel 'that extra push over the cliff... ...You put it up to 11' )

@anon23612428 (i think was previously known as Torvic on here) started this topic about kernel tick frequency and model when kernel v4.15 had CONFIG_HZ_1000=y option
there was also this discussion about 4.19 RT Kernel focus shifted in that discussion to full-tickless kernels and responses did not show a consensus on 1000Hz

users at linuxmusicians.com have more demanding requirements for their workflow than anything i do now. opinions are based on real use-cases creating content

One month and counting without RT kernel on Arch Linux
the performance of the stock kernel for audio work tends to improve over time, which means that the use case for a custom kernel is getting narrower and narrower. It looks like many users here have already moved on.
Which is good, because compiling an RT patched kernel (and maintaining it) is a a pain, unless your distro provides one.
The reason is what Jack Winter said: the RT patch set features are gradually getting incorporated into the stock kernel, so this discussion should finally become irrelevant very soon.

The 'stock' Arch kernel isn't stock though :) . It's a low latency kernel, which you can tell from uname -a . It says 'PREEMPT' in the name, which means it's a low latency kernel.

For audio production, the input data for the audio card (sound card,...) is a data stream with low jitter and a high data rate.

Forum kindly sponsored by