Messages in this thread |  | | | Date | Sat, 24 Jul 1999 16:50:19 +0200 (CEST) | | From | Ingo Molnar <> | | Subject | Re: real-time threaded IO with low latency (audio) |
| |
On Fri, 23 Jul 1999, Oliver Xymoron wrote:
> Exactly. But it has never been intended to be a realtime system in the > true sense of the word. Nor is that something we want to aim for. Consider > for a moment that systems like QNX don't implement things like the page > faulting half of virtual memory (though they still have separate address > spaces) and ask yourself why they don't even in 1999 and you might begin > to understand why there will never be an absolute guarantee on latency in > Linux. Our average performance will be better though.
i agree that we are far from being RT, but i can see no contradiction between having page-faultable virtual memory and soft-RT (or even hard-RT). Obviously the RT process wants to use mlock().
-- mingo
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
|  |