RE: Attempted summary of "RT patch acceptance" thread

["Saksena, Manas" <Manas.Saksena@timesys.com>]

Karim Yaghmour wrote:
> In essence, what you ask can only hold if all kernel developers
> intend for Linux to become QNX. Clearly this isn't going to happen.

The needs that Linux and QNX (or, whatever your favorite RTOS is)
fulfill are not that separate. 

Keep in mind that Linux has been making inroads into traditional
RTOS markets for 4+ years. RTOSes have been used in many devices
and systems -- many of which do not need the "ruby/diamond" hard
variety of real-time -- preempt-rt would be hard-enough for a 
very large number of devices/systems that currently use an RTOS
(or non mainline Linux kernel). 

> From my point of view, determinism and best overall performance are
> conflicting goals. 

And, likewise SMP and large system scalability will often conflict
with desktop performance. Or, interactive performance goals conflict
with server throughput goals, and so on.... 

> Having separate derectories for something as
> fundamentally different from best overall performance as determinism
> is not too much to ask.   

It probably is too much to ask. In the end, it may very well be the 
case that some capabilities will naturally be partitioned into separate 
directories, but I don't think we are there yet. 

Manas
-
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/