Re: PREEMPT_RT vs ADEOS: the numbers, part 1

[Philippe Gerum <rpm@xenomai.org>]

Kristian Benoit wrote:
> On Sat, 2005-06-11 at 02:15 -0700, Sven-Thorsten Dietrich wrote:
>
> > Its a good start, and its excellent that its being looked at. Thank
> > you
> > guys very much for taking the time to compare these 2 very different
> > systems. 
>
>
> Youre welcome !
>
>
> > I think the comparison should absolutely compare identical community
> > kernels. The comparison between two different release candidates is
> > questionable. rc2 to rc4 doesn't seem like much, after all, how much
> > code could go into a release candidate. (diff | wc -l) 
>
>
> I agree with that, but as the results show, there does'nt seems to be
> much difference impact the numbers in the tested field.
>
>
> > Also, I question testing -rc code in the first place, except for
> > regression purposes. 
>
>
> I tested the -rc code in orther to be able to compare the patched
> kernels against theird own source.
>
>
> > How does that effort compare for porting ADEOS code? If several weeks
> > of
> > work are invested in a comparison of rc2 to rc4, how much additional
> > work is needed to bring Adeos up to the base for the current RT
> > kernel?

It has already been done using 2.6.12-rc2/x86 + RT-V0.7.44-03 a few 
weeks ago. Since it was the first time such merge was attempted, it took 
me a week to get a functional patch which could run a complex "client" 
OS such as RTAI over it. Now that the infrastructure is in place, I 
guess that the task should be simpler, since hopefully, I now better 
understand the implications of having PREEMPT_RT into the kernel codebase.

> Philippe, I think that question is youre !

--

Philippe.
-
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/