Re: RT patch acceptance

[Karim Yaghmour]

Bill Huey (hui) wrote:
>>From my memory DRM drivers have direct path to the vertical retrace
> through the current ioctl() interface. It's not an issue for that driver
> and probably many others that use simple syscalls like that.

This is rather short. Can you elaborate a little on what you're trying
to say here? thanks.

> The RT patch isn't hard to maintain and only one jerk-off objected to
> it without providing any useful information why the single kernel
> approach is faulty other than it jars his easily offended sensibilities

I didn't say the RT patch was hard to maintain. I said that it increased
the cost of maintenance for the rest of the kernel (which is the feeling
that seems to be echoed by other peoples' answers in this thread.)

BTW, please take a breath here. I'm not interested in taking part in a
flame-fest.

Karim
-- 
Author, Speaker, Developer, Consultant
Pushing Embedded and Real-Time Linux Systems Beyond the Limits
http://www.opersys.com || karim@xxxxxxxxxxx || 1-866-677-4546
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/