[lkml]   [2005]   [May]   [24]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    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

    > 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 :)


    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2005-05-24 17:35    [W:0.019 / U:29.132 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site