Messages in this thread | | | Subject | RE: Attempted summary of "RT patch acceptance" thread | Date | Mon, 13 Jun 2005 18:20:10 -0400 | From | "Saksena, Manas" <> |
| |
Karim Yaghmour wrote: > In essence, what you ask can only hold if all kernel developers > intend for Linux to become QNX. Clearly this isn't going to happen.
The needs that Linux and QNX (or, whatever your favorite RTOS is) fulfill are not that separate.
Keep in mind that Linux has been making inroads into traditional RTOS markets for 4+ years. RTOSes have been used in many devices and systems -- many of which do not need the "ruby/diamond" hard variety of real-time -- preempt-rt would be hard-enough for a very large number of devices/systems that currently use an RTOS (or non mainline Linux kernel).
> From my point of view, determinism and best overall performance are > conflicting goals.
And, likewise SMP and large system scalability will often conflict with desktop performance. Or, interactive performance goals conflict with server throughput goals, and so on....
> Having separate derectories for something as > fundamentally different from best overall performance as determinism > is not too much to ask.
It probably is too much to ask. In the end, it may very well be the case that some capabilities will naturally be partitioned into separate directories, but I don't think we are there yet.
Manas - 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/
| |