Roger Larsson wrote:
>
> On Tuesday den 4 September 2001 18:24, Christopher Friesen wrote:
> > Fred wrote:
> > > I'm curious, Alan, Why? I'm a hardware developer, and I would have
> > > assumed that linux would have been ideal for real time / embedded
> > > projects? (routers / controllers / etc.) Is there, for instance, a reason
> > > to suspect that linux would not be able to respond to interrupts at say
> > > 8Khz?
> > > of course I know nothing of rtlinux so I'll read.
> >
> > I'm involved in a project where we are using linux in an embedded
> > application. We've got a gig of ram, no hard drives, no video, and the only
> > I/O is serial, ethernet and fiberchannel.
> >
> > We have a realtime process that tries to run every 50ms. We're seeing
> > actual worst-case scheduling latencies upwards of 300-400ms.
> 1) Why shouldn't the low-latency patches work for another architecture?
> Andrew Morton might be interested to fix other architectures too.
> (but most patches are not in architecture specific code)
Well, a while back I took a look at the low latency patch and saw a bunch of
arch-specific files being modified so I assumed that it wouldn't do much on a
different architecture. I may have been wrong. I guess its time for me to do
some testing.
Chris
-- Chris Friesen | MailStop: 043/33/F10 Nortel Networks | work: (613) 765-0557 3500 Carling Avenue | fax: (613) 765-2986 Nepean, ON K2H 8E9 Canada | email: cfriesen@nortelnetworks.com - 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/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Sep 07 2001 - 21:00:27 EST