Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 31 May 2005 21:14:59 -0400 | From | Karim Yaghmour <> | Subject | Re: RT patch acceptance |
| |
[ removed a lot of interesting stuff ... ]
Andrea Arcangeli wrote: > The point where preempt-RT enters the hard-RT equation, is only if you need > syscall execution in realtime (like audio, but audio doesn't need > hard-RT, so preempt-RT can only do good from an audio standpoint, it > makes perfect sense that jack is used as argument for preempt-RT). If > you need syscalls with hard-RT, the whole thing gets an order of > magnitude more complicated and software becomes involved anyways, so > then one can just hope that preempt-RT will get everything right and > that somebody will demonstrate it.
Please have a look at RTAI-fusion. It provides deterministic replacements for rt-able syscalls _transparently_ to STANDARD Linux applications. For example, an unmodified Linux application can get a deterministic nanosleep() via RTAI-fusion. The way this works, is that rtai-fusion catches the syscalls prior to them reaching Linux. So even the syscall thing isn't really a limitation for RTAI anymore.
Philippe would be in a better position to elaborate, but that's the essentials of it.
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/
| |