Moode Forum

Full Version: Upcoming moOde 6.6.0 feature release
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
OK, I decided to run the vulnerability past Jean-Francois, this is what he had to say:

“I don't think that CallStranger is a major concern if your music-playing machine is not accessible from the Internet. You would have to have a rogue control point on your network which would be somehow less privileged than the renderer in Moode (how?) and uses CallStranger to overcome its own restrictions This seems very dubious to me, esp. since, to exfiltrate data, you'd need to also control the events, and for DDOS, why not do it from the control point ?

One very far-fetched DDOS scenario would be that the renderer has a fast internet link and the CP is on slow wireless, and is able to get the renderer to send a lot of data out, but frankly, I would not be worried about this: because it would be a very rare situation, nobody is going to try and exploit it.
Now if your renderer is a supercomputer on the national science backbone or whatever, maybe we need to rethink Smile

OTOH, I see little reason not to use 4.0.7. Maybe that's just because Moode did the testing with 4.0.2 ?”

Maybe therefore my suggestion was a bit crazy, but there again I'm a Windows user so have to take note of such things!! 
Big Grin
Ok, thanks for following up. It doesn't look like anything to be concerned about.
Sorry if I missed it but will 6.6.0 be an in place upgrade or new install please?
(07-06-2020, 09:53 AM)grasshopper Wrote: [ -> ]Sorry if I missed it but will 6.6.0 be an in place upgrade or new install please?

It will be an in-place upgrade for users of 6.5.x -- at least according to what I read previously.  Corrections welcome in case I got anything wrong.
Not sure if I should post this here, or in 6.5.etc..   but I noticed something odd during my finding the Crossfeed/EQ  data rate compatibility issue I stumbled across with my DAC... (posted on here some several weeks back) that turned out to be mostly a localized, not so big issue...   But,  in the process of figuring that out,  I noticed something I've meant to bring up.

When I was comparing a 6.4.2 Moode system with a 6.5.2 one,  in running with the headphone crossfeed filter enabled and high bitrate/data rate feeds...   I noticed that the later version seemed to use a LOT more CPU than the earlier one.  To say it another way, when running the same extra filtering, under the same hardware and conditions.,  the newer version had a much higher load,  what was a 30% load under 6.4.2,  became a 70% under 6.5.2.   This was drastically different enough to make me wonder.  This is on a Pi 3 1.2,  so a sort of fast board.  70% CPU use is a lot, but probably not problematic,  though the more headroom the better,  for a quiet, uninterrupted system. Haven't tried it on something lower powered.  I worry if on a Pi-0 or Pi-1 it might go from able to run a EQ or Crossfeed filter with no problems, to it compromising the system if you do.

Anyway, it's two different versions of MPC (0.21.16,  to 0.21.22) and am wondering if there is some kind of config thing that maybe needs attention,  or something.  That's a lot of change in CPU use for the same task.  I wouldn't expect it from a minor revision change.
Just ran a quick test on Pi-3B 1.2, unreleased stock moOde 6.6.0 playing the Stereo Test track (16/48K), Criossfeed 700 Hz 4.5 dB filter, Pi On-board audio device.

I'm seeing CPU utilization at 1%

Code:
pi@moode:~ $ moodeutl -m
CPU: 800 MHz | LOAD: 1% | TEMP: 46°C | RAM_USED: 16% | DISK_USED: 80% | DISK_FREE: 673M | FPM_POOL: 9 workers  
(07-07-2020, 11:49 AM)Tim Curtis Wrote: [ -> ]Just ran a quick test on Pi-3B 1.2, unreleased stock moOde 6.6.0 playing the Stereo Test track (16/48K), Criossfeed 700 Hz 4.5 dB filter, Pi On-board audio device.

I'm seeing CPU utilization at 1%

Code:
pi@moode:~ $ moodeutl -m
CPU: 800 MHz | LOAD: 1% | TEMP: 46°C | RAM_USED: 16% | DISK_USED: 80% | DISK_FREE: 673M | FPM_POOL: 9 workers  

I'll check mine again, maybe tonight.   I still have 6.5.2,  may have updated the earlier system.  Also,  my conditions were with resampling up to 32/384 or similar, so a big resampling load as well.  (was checking 32b and higher bitrate compatibiliies, with my DAC, originally)
(07-06-2020, 09:53 AM)grasshopper Wrote: [ -> ]Sorry if I missed it but will 6.6.0 be an in place upgrade or new install please?

I'm currently working on the in-place update but it will not include the OS upgrade to RaspiOS 10.4. The new OS will only be in the  new moOde 6.6.0 image. This is to ensure maximum reliability.

We might release the 6.6.0 image first just to get all the goodness from the contributor crew into your hands. The in-place update for 6.5.2 -> 6.6.0 will follow :-)

-Tim
(07-07-2020, 11:17 PM)Tim Curtis Wrote: [ -> ]The in-place update for 6.5.2 -> 6.6.0 will follow :-)

I think I actually prefer the fresh image update method. It makes me revisit my settings and question afresh why I have certain things.
(07-07-2020, 11:17 PM)Tim Curtis Wrote: [ -> ]
(07-06-2020, 09:53 AM)grasshopper Wrote: [ -> ]Sorry if I missed it but will 6.6.0 be an in place upgrade or new install please?

I'm currently working on the in-place update but it will not include the OS upgrade to RaspiOS 10.4. The new OS will only be in the  new moOde 6.6.0 image. This is to ensure maximum reliability.

We might release the 6.6.0 image first just to get all the goodness from the contributor crew into your hands. The in-place update for 6.5.2 -> 6.6.0 will follow :-)

-Tim

Cheers, I will try & test both options.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7