Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 8 Jun 2005 19:25:12 -0700 | From | "Paul E. McKenney" <> | Subject | Re: Attempted summary of "RT patch acceptance" thread |
| |
On Wed, Jun 08, 2005 at 12:51:05PM -0400, Karim Yaghmour wrote: > > Paul, > > I've finished reading your summary and I must say that it's excellent. > I don't remember ever reading a non-partisan comparison of this level > on the issue of real-time and Linux. Thanks for writing _and_ having > the guts to post it :)
Thank you for the kind words! But who needs guts when you have senility? ;-)
> There is only one issue I would like to further highlight. > > Note: None of the following should be in any way controversial, I'm > just providing further background.
;-) ;-) ;-)
> Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > the corresponding approach's strengths and weaknesses. I do not address > > "strength of community", even though this may well be the decisive factor. > > Indeed what you state here is entirely true. While Adeos and RTAI > development has been very active for quite a few years now, it must > be said that this development has largely gone unnoticed to LKML > participants -- as was obvious by the amount of surprise caused by > the realization of the existence of key Adeos and RTAI features. > > Part of this is historical. 10 years ago, Linux's state was such > that those who were interested in doing rt with it realized that > it wasn't about to become rt-capable any time soon. Hence, they > "went away" and did their own little thing. They had their mailing > lists, their own flame-wars, their own conferences, and there was > very little common shared with the mainstream LKML community. > > In fact, for a very long time, most kernel developers I spoke to > about real-time would refer back to a single project, RTLinux. To > this day, actually, if you look in the MAINTAINERS file, it still > says: > > RTLINUX REALTIME LINUX > > P: Victor Yodaiken > > M: yodaiken@fsmlabs.com > > L: rtl@rtlinux.org > > W: www.rtlinux.org > > S: Maintained > Yet, the days where RTLinux was _the_ real-time Linux extension > are long gone and www.rtlinux.org has been a redirect to a .com > site for quite some time now -- I've suggested in the past that > this entry be replaced by RTAI, but I was told that neither should > in fact be in there, which is fair-enough, but nothing came of > this suggestion and the entry is still in the maintainers file. > > This state of things remained until May 2002 when I picked up on > a post by Andrea to point out a "few" problems the RTAI community > saw with the RTLinux project. The ensuing thread was remarkably > intense -- not for the faint of heart. Here's the root of it if > you're ever interested in reading a huge flame-fest: > http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-kernel&m=102227589127072&w=2 > While that discussion did serve to put RTAI on the map for some > developers, it also highlighted problems with the RTAI project > that needed to be solved. > > Part of the issues was the patent problem, and that was solved > with the introduction of Adeos. However, with this and other > problems solved, the RTAI developers went back the way they came > from: to their own separate mailing lists. > > In the past few years, though, a new bread of real-time developers > have become interested in making Linux fit for real-time > applications. Unlike the previous generation, though, these folks > have concentrated their efforts on working within the framework > already agreed upon by existing kernel developers: the LKML. And > in that, they have achieved a level of awareness amongst the kernel > crowd that I think RTAI and Adeos have not yet reached. > > I've tried to remedy to this situation as best I can, by pointing > out what was obvious to me when appropriate. However, it must be > said that I haven't been actively involved with either Adeos or > RTAI in quite some time. So while I did play a part in the > history of both projects, there are others that are in a much > better position than I am to present to the LKML the work done > by the RTAI and Adeos communities. > > In essence, therefore, what I have to say is this: > - To those who are actively involved in the development of RTAI > and Adeos, now is the time to drop the historical tendency of > acting as an entirely separate community and to start sharing > your work on the LKML. > - To those who are actively involved in finding solutions to the > real-time issues in Linux, do not be fooled by the apparent lack > of activity in the Adeos or RTAI projects, they are both very > active and warrant consideration. > > As you correctly state, "strength of community" is likely a decisive > factor. What is important here is not to confuse "apparent" strength > of community -- or lack thereof -- with "actual" strength of > community -- or lack thereof.
All good points! I added a few sentences encouraging realtime folks to participate in LKML discussions.
Thanx, Paul
> Thanks again for a great piece. > > Karim Yaghmour > -- > 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/
| |