Re: [offtopic] Re: 2.2.2: 2 thumbs up from lm

Richard B. Johnson (root@chaos.analogic.com)
Fri, 26 Feb 1999 08:06:01 -0500 (EST)


On Fri, 26 Feb 1999, Neil Conway wrote:
[SNIPPED]
>
> But how can you promise the customer that your system will respond to
> events while they are current if you DON'T control the latency?
>
> This is the crux.
>

I have a CPU which does nothing but poll a port. I want to detect
when the sun comes up which happens once a day. There is a photo
controller relay connected to that port. I need to know this time
within one second.

Therefore I need to poll this port at least twice per second.
Twice comes from Shannon since this has become a sampled system.

Do we care how much time it takes to poll this port as long as
the specified conditions are met? This is the latency and, in
fact we don't care as long as the required specifications are
met. If the latency is 1/2 second, we can't guarantee that the
port is polled twice per second. However, if the latency is
one microfortnight less than 1/2 second we can.

Cheers,
Dick Johnson
***** FILE SYSTEM WAS MODIFIED *****
Penguin : Linux version 2.2.1 on an i686 machine (400.59 BogoMips).
Warning : It's hard to remain at the trailing edge of technology.
Wisdom : It's not a Y2K problem. It's a Y2Day problem.

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/