Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 22 Jun 2005 21:09:30 -0400 | From | Karim Yaghmour <> | Subject | Re: PREEMPT_RT vs I-PIPE: the numbers, part 2 |
| |
Bill Huey (hui) wrote: > He's probably confusing you from the real FUDers. I don't see you > as a FUDer.
Thanks, I appreciate the vote of confidence.
> He's just resentful fighting with you over attention from the same > batch of strippers at last years OLS. :)
But I don't want to "fight" Ingo. There would just be no point whatsoever with "fighting" with one the best developers Linux has. I started my involvement in these recent threads with a very clear statement that I was open to being shown wrong in having exclusively championed the nanokernel approach in the past. I set out to show myself wrong with these tests and beside some vague expectations, I truely didn't know what I was going to find. I certainly wouldn't have bet a hot-dog on preempt_rt coming neck-to-neck with the ipipe on interrupt latency ... So yes, in doing so some results I've found aren't that nice. But, hell, I didn't invent those results. They are there for anyone to repdroduce or contradict. I have no monopoly over LMbench, PC hardware, the Linux kernel, or anything else used to get those numbers.
Karim -- Author, Speaker, Developer, Consultant Pushing Embedded and Real-Time Linux Systems Beyond the Limits http://www.opersys.com || karim@opersys.com || 1-866-677-4546 - 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/
| |