[PlanetCCRMA] which Fedora?

Fernando Lopez-Lezcano nando at ccrma.Stanford.EDU
Wed Nov 10 11:27:54 PST 2010

On 11/10/2010 01:18 AM, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 10:22 PM, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
>> On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 10:17 PM, Fernando Lopez-Lezcano wrote:
>>> Ah, then it is not working. I _am_ running an rt kernel, uname -r has
>>> 'ccrma' in it... (it is a fc12 kernel but that should not matter).
>> Ah... I remember I tested this on F-13 both with and without CCRMA
>> kernel and it worked fine (maybe I remember it wrong?)
> In the patch, I think I need to use utsname.release instead of utsname.version
> Could you send me the output of this program when you are running a
> ccrma rt kernel on F-14?
> #include<sys/utsname.h>
> #include<iostream>
> #include<string.h>
> using namespace std;
> int main()
> {
>    struct utsname utsname;
>    int success = uname(&utsname );
>    cout<<  "utsname.sysname:"<<  utsname.sysname<<  endl;
>    cout<<  "utsname.version:"<<  utsname.version<<  endl;
>    cout<<  "utsname.release:"<<  utsname.release<<  endl;
>    cout<<  success<<  endl;
>    cout<<  strstr( utsname.release, "ccrma" )<<  endl;
> }

Here's what it prints:

utsname.version:#1 SMP PREEMPT RT Tue Sep 7 14:36:14 EDT 2010

Looks like you are right and "release" is the one to use.  When I have 
some time I'll try to get a better test that does not depend on "ccrma" 
being on the release part of the kernel. Probably something that would 
do the equivalent of:

grep PREEMPT_RT /boot/config-

Which would only be defined in rt patched kernels regardless of their 

-- Fernando

More information about the PlanetCCRMA mailing list