Re: Good performance (hard realtime ??) on 2.6.16 patched with patch-2.6.16-rt29 from Ingo Molnar

On Mon, 2006-06-12 at 11:12 +0100, Felix Oxley wrote:
> (Regarding Hard Real Time, my understanding is that that depends on a
> _guarantee_ that the system will always be able to produce the  
> 'result' within the required interval. Ingo's -rt patches may give  
> exceedingly good responsiveness but they offer no guarantees, so they
> cannot be considered Hard Real Time) 

The -rt kernel is capable of hard realtime, modulo any bugs, but no one
has yet done an analysis of the few non-preemptible code paths to
determine what guarantees it can make.

Lee

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

---

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: Good performance (hard realtime ??) on 2.6.16 patched with patch-2.6.16-rt29 from Ingo Molnar
    • From: Esben Nielsen <[email protected]>

• References:
  • Good performance (hard realtime ??) on 2.6.16 patched with patch-2.6.16-rt29 from Ingo Molnar
    • From: [email protected]
  • Re: Good performance (hard realtime ??) on 2.6.16 patched with patch-2.6.16-rt29 from Ingo Molnar
    • From: Felix Oxley <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: NPTL mutex and the scheduling priority
• Next by Date: [RFC] scheduler issue & patch
• Previous by thread: Re: Good performance (hard realtime ??) on 2.6.16 patched with patch-2.6.16-rt29 from Ingo Molnar
• Next by thread: Re: Good performance (hard realtime ??) on 2.6.16 patched with patch-2.6.16-rt29 from Ingo Molnar
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Stuff]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]     [Linux Resources]