Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261797AbVE3WpX (ORCPT ); Mon, 30 May 2005 18:45:23 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261798AbVE3WpW (ORCPT ); Mon, 30 May 2005 18:45:22 -0400 Received: from opersys.com ([64.40.108.71]:33039 "EHLO www.opersys.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261797AbVE3WoZ (ORCPT ); Mon, 30 May 2005 18:44:25 -0400 Message-ID: <429B99B4.9090005@opersys.com> Date: Mon, 30 May 2005 18:54:44 -0400 From: Karim Yaghmour Reply-To: karim@opersys.com Organization: Opersys inc. User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7.2) Gecko/20040805 Netscape/7.2 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, fr, fr-be, fr-ca, fr-fr MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Bill Huey (hui)" CC: Nick Piggin , James Bruce , Andi Kleen , Sven-Thorsten Dietrich , Ingo Molnar , dwalker@mvista.com, hch@infradead.org, akpm@osdl.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: RT patch acceptance References: <20050527120812.GA375@nietzsche.lynx.com> <429715DE.6030008@yahoo.com.au> <20050527233645.GA2283@nietzsche.lynx.com> <4297EB57.5090902@yahoo.com.au> <20050528054503.GA2958@nietzsche.lynx.com> <42981467.6020409@yahoo.com.au> <4299A98D.1080805@andrew.cmu.edu> <429ADEDD.4020805@yahoo.com.au> <429B1898.8040805@andrew.cmu.edu> <429B2160.7010005@yahoo.com.au> <20050530222747.GB9972@nietzsche.lynx.com> In-Reply-To: <20050530222747.GB9972@nietzsche.lynx.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1294 Lines: 30 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@opersys.com || 1-866-677-4546 - 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/