![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
Daniel Walker wrote: > The main reason for my email is that I know Andrew and Linus don't want > interrupts in threads. Without that there is no PREEMPT_RT . If you want > to narrow the discussion to just interrupts in threads that's fine with > me, cause that's what I'm concerned about. Again, what are the technical arguments against scheduled interrupts causing these folks concern? All in all it is just a different locking paradigm where interrupt-initiated scheduling is moved closer to the metal. -john -- john.cooper@timesys.com - 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 18:42 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||||