![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
Sven-Thorsten Dietrich wrote: > - Voluntary Preemption by Ingo Molnar > - IRQ thread patches by Scott Wood and Ingo Molnar > - BKL mutex patch by Ingo Molnar (with MV extensions) > - PMutex from Germany's Universitaet der Bundeswehr, Munich > - MontaVista mutex abstraction layer replacing spinlocks with mutexes To the best of my understanding, this still doesn't provide deterministic hard-real-time performance in Linux. > There are several micro-kernel solutions available, which achieve > the required performance, but there are two general concerns with > such solutions: > > 1. Two separate kernel environments, creating more overall > system complexity and application design complexity. > 2. Legal controversy. It's been quite a while since any of this has been true. > In line with the above mentioned previous Kernel enhancements, > our work is designed to be transparent to existing applications > and drivers. I guess you haven't taken a look at the work on RTAI/fusion lately. Applications use the same Linux API, and get deterministic hard-real-time response times. It's really much less complicated to use than the above-suggested aggregate. Karim -- Author, Speaker, Developer, Consultant Pushing Embedded and Real-Time Linux Systems Beyond the Limits http://www.opersys.com || karim@opersys.com || 1-866-677-4546 - 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/ | ||||||||||||
| Last update: 2005-03-22 14:06 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||||