ext Felipe Contreras wrote:

quoted text
> I think this information can be obtained dynamically while the
> application is running,

yes, that was the idea

quoted text
>  and perhaps the limits can be stored. It would
> be pretty difficult for the applications to give this kind of
> information because there are so many variables.
>
> For example, an media player can tell you: this clip has 24 fps, but
> if the user is moving the time slider, the fps would increase and drop
> very rapidly, and how much depends at least on the container format
> and type of seek.
>   

I doubt that belongs to typical QoS. Maybe the target could be to be 
able to decode a sequence of i-frames?
quoted text
> A game or a telephony app could tell you "I need real-time priority"
> but so much as giving the details of latency and bandwidth? I find
> that very unlikely.
>   

from my gaming days the games were still evaluated in fps ... maybe i 
made the wrong assumption?

A telephony app should still be able to tell if it's dropping audio frames.

In all cases there should be some device independent limit - like: what 
is the sort of degradation that is considered acceptable by the typical 
user?

Tuning might be offered, but at least this should set some sane set of 
defaults.

igor
--
unsubscribe notice
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/