Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261454AbVEXIdq (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 May 2005 04:33:46 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261453AbVEXIch (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 May 2005 04:32:37 -0400 Received: from smtp203.mail.sc5.yahoo.com ([216.136.129.93]:40816 "HELO smtp203.mail.sc5.yahoo.com") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S261475AbVEXI1I (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 May 2005 04:27:08 -0400 Message-ID: <4292E559.3080302@yahoo.com.au> Date: Tue, 24 May 2005 18:27:05 +1000 From: Nick Piggin User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7.6) Gecko/20050324 Debian/1.7.6-1 X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Ingo Molnar CC: Christoph Hellwig , Daniel Walker , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, akpm@osdl.org, sdietrich@mvista.com Subject: Re: RT patch acceptance References: <1116890066.13086.61.camel@dhcp153.mvista.com> <20050524054722.GA6160@infradead.org> <20050524064522.GA9385@elte.hu> <4292DFC3.3060108@yahoo.com.au> <20050524081517.GA22205@elte.hu> In-Reply-To: <20050524081517.GA22205@elte.hu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1654 Lines: 41 Ingo Molnar wrote: > * Nick Piggin wrote: > > >>Of course this is weighed off against the improvements added to the >>kernel. I'm personally not too clear on what those improvements are; a >>bit better soft-realtime response? (I don't know) [...] > > > what the -RT kernel (PREEMPT_RT) offers are guaranteed hard-realtime > responses. ~15 usecs worst-case latency on a 2GHz Athlon64. On arbitrary > (SCHED_OTHER) workloads. (I.e. i've measured such worst-case latencies > when running 1000 hackbench tasks or when swapping the box to death, or > when running 40 parallel copies of the LTP testsuite.) > Oh OK, I didn't realise it is aiming for hard RT. Cool! but that wasn't so much the main point I was trying to make... > so it's well worth the effort, but there's no hurry and all the changes > are incremental anyway. I can understand Daniel's desire for more action > (he's got a product to worry about), but upstream isnt ready for this > yet. > Basically the same questions I think will still be up for debate. Not that I want to start now, nor do I really have any feelings on the matter yet (other than I'm glad you're not in a hurry :)). For example, it may not be clear to everyone that it is automatically well worth the effort ;) And others may really want the functionality but prefer it to be done in a specialised software like Christoph said. Nick - 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/