lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2005]   [Jun]   [10]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: Attempted summary of "RT patch acceptance" thread
From
Date
On Fri, 2005-06-10 at 19:37 +0200, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:

>
> preempt-RT _can_ do something about it but only _if_ people hacks the
> drivers properly and makes sure to call local_irq_save_nort instead of
> local_irq_save and other explicit changes like that, things that if
> missing are noticeable only during measurements with preempt-RT config
> option enabled (hence the metal-hard classification of preempt-RT and
> not ruby-hard definition).


This is no longer an issue. We did an interrupt disable conversion so
now there is only a few places that actually disable interrupts. It
hasn't been tested fully, but you should be able to used whatever
drivers you want and still get the same interrupt latency. However,
preempt latency is still and issue for these drivers.

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: 2005-06-10 22:26    [from the cache]
©2003-2014 Jasper Spaans. Advertise on this site