lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2005]   [May]   [24]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: RT patch acceptance
K.R. Foley wrote:

>
> There are definitely those who would prefer to have the functionality,
> at least as an option, in the mainline kernel. The group that I contract
> for get heartburn about having to patch every kernel running on every
> development workstation and every production system. We need hard RT,
> but currently when we have to have hard RT we go with a different
> product.

Well, yes. There are lots of things Linux isn't suited for.
There are likewise a lot of patches that SGI would love to
get into the kernel so it runs better on their 500+ CPU
systems. My point was just that a new functionality/feature
doesn't by itself justify being included in the kernel.org
kernel.

> Another thing that some of us want/need is a hard real-time
> Linux that doesn't create the segregation that most of these specialized
> products create. Currently there are damn few choices for real posix
> applications development with hard RT requirements running in a Unix
> environment.
>

Maybe there are damn few because it is hard to get right within
the framework of a general posix environment. Or maybe its
because it has a comparatively small userbase (compared to say
mid/small servers and desktops). Which are neither completely
invalid reasons against its inclusion in Linux.

But I want to be clear that I haven't read or thought about the
code in question too much, and I don't have any opinions on it
yet. So please nobody involve me in a flamewar about it :)

Nick


-
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: 2005-05-24 17:35    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans