![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
On Tue, 2005-05-24 at 10:15 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > * Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au> wrote: > > > Of course this is weighed off against the improvements added to the > > kernel. I'm personally not too clear on what those improvements are; a > > bit better soft-realtime response? (I don't know) [...] > > what the -RT kernel (PREEMPT_RT) offers are guaranteed hard-realtime > responses. ~15 usecs worst-case latency on a 2GHz Athlon64. On arbitrary > (SCHED_OTHER) workloads. (I.e. i've measured such worst-case latencies > when running 1000 hackbench tasks or when swapping the box to death, or > when running 40 parallel copies of the LTP testsuite.) I wouldn't start making guarantees yet .. For instance printk can hold off interrupts for unknown periods (unknown to me anyway) depending on the size of the strings that it prints. Daniel - 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 20:07 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||||