lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2005]   [May]   [24]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [more markup]  [less markup]  [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
DateTue, 24 May 2005 12:27:41 -0400
Fromjohn cooper <>
SubjectRe: RT patch acceptance
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