[02:45] <SonikkuAmerica> Hello, is anyone 'round at this hour? I'm not sure if anyone else mentioned this, but I know it was a big problem in the Raring and Saucy series that naming the EFI boot files folder "ubuntustudio" instead of "ubuntu" caused the machine to go right to the GRUB prompt. Has this been fixed?
[02:45] <holstein> SonikkuAmerica: i thought our kerenel didnt work with efi.. 
[02:46] <SonikkuAmerica> You're right, the KERNEL doesn't. But that doesn't stop grub-efi-amd64-* from listing and launching it...
[02:47] <SonikkuAmerica> (I tested this in Saucy. Renaming the "ubuntustudio" folder to "ubuntu" in /boot/efi/EFI/ fixed the configfile problem, and I was able to load either the -generic or -lowlatency entry.)
[02:48] <holstein> SonikkuAmerica: so, our lowlwatency kernel can do UEFI?
[02:49] <holstein> zequence: do you know about this? ^
[02:49] <SonikkuAmerica> (Yes, it would help if he was involved with this. Especially since I think I can reproduce it. I'll need to do it in VBox, because I have Xubuntu on hard metal)
[02:54] <SonikkuAmerica> (It'll also take me a few days to reproduce, since I'm busy all weekend.)
[02:59] <SonikkuAmerica> holstein: As far as I've tested, even though it's not a vmlinuz.efi, I'm about 99% positive GRUB will launch it. If I can reproduce it in the Trusty series, we should DEFINITELY let zequence know.
[03:01] <SonikkuAmerica> But I have to go to bed now, I need to be up at 6:00am and it's 11:00pm now.
[04:16] <OvenWerk1> holstein: grub sees ubuntustudio as just ubuntu once again from 13.10 beta on. The original problem has been fixed and we should now be able to get grub to show ubuntustudio once again, but I don't have the HW to test it on.  :)
[04:16]  * OvenWerk1 just walked in from practice.
[05:53] <peanutb> moving over from #ubuntustudio. Has anyone successfully compiled an RT kernel on 14.04? I've been having trouble with ata failed write commands and I/O errors
[05:54] <peanutb> these errors don't show up when i use a vanilla kernel, only when i use the kernel with the PREEMPT RT patch
[05:55] <peanutb> the low-latency kernel isn't really an option for my application sadly, and seems to exhibit similar behavior.
[05:56] <stochastic> peanutb, just to clarify, low-latency also suffers from the ata failed write commands and I/O errors?
[05:58] <peanutb> i think so. i may be wrong. I've re-build the kernel so many times its hard to remember exactly.
[05:58] <peanutb> *built
[06:00] <peanutb> There was at least a pretty noticeable performance hit when using the low-latency kernel when compared to the generic or the one i built from source
[06:00] <peanutb> I also tried using the same kernel on a different computer (with similar specs though) and it gave the same type of ata errors
[06:01] <stochastic> have you tried the low-latency one that's in the repositories?
[06:01] <stochastic> rather than rolling your own?
[06:01] <peanutb> i was using the one from the repositories
[06:01] <stochastic> ok
[06:02] <stochastic> if that one is giving those errors please file a bug report
[06:02] <stochastic> it's maintained by the canonical kernel team
[06:02] <stochastic> now I realize that won't help much for your application but it'd be good to iron out those bugs
[06:02] <peanutb> i also have 12.04 installed on the machine and it seems to work perfectly with the rt kernel from https://launchpad.net/~linux-libre/+archive/rt-ppa
[06:03] <stochastic> is there any reason you're choosing to use 14.04?
[06:03] <stochastic> it's still beta software
[06:03] <peanutb> Were doing a new relase in june, targeting the next release of ROS (robot operating system)
[06:04] <peanutb> So i wanted to get started early-ish
[06:04] <stochastic> understandable
[06:05] <stochastic> well there's been talk about looking into getting the rt kernel back into ubuntustudio
[06:05] <stochastic> but we're rather thin on dev resources
[06:05] <stochastic> zequence was asking if I could start looking into it soon
[06:05] <peanutb> Yeah. I saw the spec on launchpad. Any way I could help out?
[06:05] <stochastic> yes, certainly
[06:06] <stochastic> honestly, I haven't dug my teeth into it just yet, I'm just getting back on board this project after a hiatus, but will be for the 14.10 release cycle
[06:07] <stochastic> zequence would probably be the best to talk to for now, but if you'd like to stick around here, I'm sure we can bounce ideas off one another
[06:07] <peanutb> okay. Ill be around
[06:07] <peanutb> Ill be back in the lab tomorrow so I'll actually have access to the machine im testing on.
[06:07]  * stochastic is currently rebuilding kernels for some device drivers and will tackle some -rt work after it's done
[06:23] <zequence> peanutb: So, you're applying the rt patch to the ubuntu linux source, and not the vanilla source?
[06:26] <zequence> hmm, I guess not, since there's no patch for that version (3.11)
[06:26] <zequence> 3.13, sorry
[06:27] <zequence> peanutb: It would be interesting to know if -lowlatency has those errors. The likelyhood would be very small, since -generic and -lowlatency is more or less the same kernel
[06:28] <zequence> if you're having problems with the vanilla kernel, with the rt patch applied, I would recommend you to contact the realtime patch developers
[06:28] <zequence> let's see..
[06:29] <zequence> the mail list for users is called linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org
[06:30] <zequence> (I think developers just use the regular linux list, not sure)
[06:35] <peanutb> I was applying the rt patch to the vanulla source
[06:36] <peanutb> Ill check again tomorrow and see whether or not -lowlatency causes the errors as well
[07:03] <zequence> peanutb: MIght not be a bad idea to test the vanilla kernel for the same bug.
[07:03] <zequence> without the rt patch, I mean
[22:04] <peanutb> zequence: The vanilla kernel without the RT patch works perfectly.
[22:04] <peanutb> The RT kernel (when its not crashing) actually has higher latency than the vanilla kernel.