Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S262154AbVEXXR3 (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 May 2005 19:17:29 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S262151AbVEXXR3 (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 May 2005 19:17:29 -0400 Received: from smtp.lnxw.com ([207.21.185.24]:8964 "EHLO smtp.lnxw.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S262154AbVEXXRT (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 May 2005 19:17:19 -0400 Date: Tue, 24 May 2005 16:21:55 -0700 To: Nick Piggin Cc: "K.R. Foley" , Ingo Molnar , Christoph Hellwig , Daniel Walker , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, akpm@osdl.org, sdietrich@mvista.com Subject: Re: RT patch acceptance Message-ID: <20050524232155.GB17781@nietzsche.lynx.com> 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> <4292E559.3080302@yahoo.com.au> <42930E79.1030305@cybsft.com> <42934674.30406@yahoo.com.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <42934674.30406@yahoo.com.au> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.9i From: Bill Huey (hui) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 3515 Lines: 73 On Wed, May 25, 2005 at 01:21:24AM +1000, Nick Piggin wrote: > Maybe there are damn few because it is hard to get right within > the framework of a general posix environment. Or maybe its > because it has a comparatively small userbase (compared to say > mid/small servers and desktops). Which are neither completely > invalid reasons against its inclusion in Linux. Rest assured RTOS companies are going to flip when this gets to the mainstream. You might not be aware of this, but this is probably end up being the single most important patch in the software industry when it hits the mainstream. There's been an over emphasis on desktop/server and really persistent lack of understanding of the embedded market and growth within it. One of the main reasons why Linux isn't used for more embedded systems is the lack of hard RT abilities. With this patch, it has a chance to hit a large section of future consumer devices, audio/video, with the performance of frame accurate SGI IRIX boxes. SGI XFS supports some of these features but is under utilized at this moment partially as a side effect of poor Linux latency performance. As app folks start to use this more the more various subcomponents will get fixed. There's a lot of bad X11 and other app code out there in userspace. There's active work in for getting the userspace mutex stuff down, robust mutexes, so that the RT app folks can have a lot more solid development environment for traditional RT applications. However, traditional applications aren't where the excitement is. The non-traditional stuff, SGI and friends, is really where I have my interests because I'm sick of jumping/droppy media applications. Current schedulers, particularly the priority based ones, aren't suitable for temporally partitioning run-away applications from other apps. Introducing the RT patch so that the scheduler has high resolution material to control along with an appropriate frame driven scheduler can fullfill this need. It is in a lot of ways like introducing multitasking OSes for the first time to people who are use to MSDOS. Multimedia apps tended to collide with each other in that regard. With this, Linux has a strong possibility be a top gaming/multimedia platform almost over night with retuned apps and such. Microsoft can't do anything about it when this happens and we're so close right now to pull it off. Having a fully preemptive core is the precondition for all of this work. > But I want to be clear that I haven't read or thought about the > code in question too much, and I don't have any opinions on it > yet. So please nobody involve me in a flamewar about it :) The code is pretty mild for the most part and fixes a lot of preexisting hacks (spin-waiting in drivers) in the kernel. If anything it's triggered some preexisting bugs and stressed the system in ways that would still be difficult to trigger in SMP scenarios. It's not terribly intrusive, nor does it alter the basic concurrency structures of the kernel. If you'd like me to, I can explain this patch to you in private. :) I was working on a parallel project to Ingo's patches and got pretty far, but have abandoned it for Ingo's stuff since he's knows the kernel much better than I do, fixes things faster, etc... bill - 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/