Re: RT patch acceptance

[Karim Yaghmour]

Bill Huey (hui) wrote:
> Think about what you need to do for app that does sound (hard RT),
> 3d drawing (mostly soft RT for this example), reading disk IO that's
> buffered.
> 
> By the time you get the sound playback and IO buffering going, you're
> going to get a pretty complicated commuication layer already going
> from those points. Now think, what if you intend to do a FFT over that
> data and display it ?
> 
> It's starting to get unmanagably complicated at that point.

But that's a general argument for having hard-rt in the standard
kernel. Which one of these steps cannot, from your point of view,
be implemented in a nanokernel archiecture? ... keeping in mind
that, as Andi mentioned, the need for increased responsivness for
the mainstream kernel is relevant with or without PREEMT_RT and
that increasing responsiveness is a never-ending work-in-progress.

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/