[lkml]   [2005]   [May]   [31]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: 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.

    Author, Speaker, Developer, Consultant
    Pushing Embedded and Real-Time Linux Systems Beyond the Limits || || 1-866-677-4546
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2005-06-01 03:12    [W:0.025 / U:94.728 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site