Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752941AbYJBTYR (ORCPT ); Thu, 2 Oct 2008 15:24:17 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753796AbYJBTYD (ORCPT ); Thu, 2 Oct 2008 15:24:03 -0400 Received: from hrndva-omtalb.mail.rr.com ([71.74.56.122]:37203 "EHLO hrndva-omtalb.mail.rr.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754047AbYJBTYC (ORCPT ); Thu, 2 Oct 2008 15:24:02 -0400 Date: Thu, 2 Oct 2008 15:23:59 -0400 (EDT) From: Steven Rostedt X-X-Sender: rostedt@gandalf.stny.rr.com To: Daniel Walker cc: Thomas Gleixner , LKML , Linus Torvalds , Andrew Morton , Ingo Molnar , Arjan van de Veen , Benjamin Herrenschmidt , Jon Masters , Sven Dietrich Subject: Re: [RFC patch 0/5] genirq: add infrastructure for threaded interrupt handlers In-Reply-To: <1222974254.2995.144.camel@laptop-eth> Message-ID: References: <20081001223213.078984344@linutronix.de> <1222912413.2995.80.camel@laptop-eth.lan> <1222962525.2995.100.camel@laptop-eth> <1222974254.2995.144.camel@laptop-eth> User-Agent: Alpine 1.10 (DEB 962 2008-03-14) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1890 Lines: 49 On Thu, 2 Oct 2008, Daniel Walker wrote: > On Thu, 2008-10-02 at 20:42 +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > > > Clearly you have neither clue about real time nor about operating > > systems in general. > > Here we go again Thomas.. You think you can have a conversation without > the insults for once? > > > Solaris, some BSDs and MacOSX use interrupt threads. Where exactly is > > the relation to realtime? > > The very fact that you mention it in your release notes .. You mention > the type of system in "preempt-rt" and the advantage of your system.. > > > The concept of interrupt threads is nothing which is in any way > > related to real time. It is a well known and pretty old concept in > > operating system design. > > > > The fact that real time operating systems benefit from interrupt > > threads is a totally different topic. > > > > The fact that a direct relationship exists means that any threaded > interrupt system needs to take into account the inevitable connection to > real time since it will be used in that system as a core component.. If > you can't effectively achieve real time with your system , than that's a > problem that needs to be addressed. Daniel, what kind of logic is this? I was already accused of being on crack today (but was just too much coffee). Perhaps you might be the one that's on crack. I build a pipe. There exists a relationship between a pipe and crap running through it from my toilet. Does this mean that every time I need a pipe, that I need to take into account the inevitable connection to crap to run through it? God, I can see the problems with my gas lines. -- Steve -- 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/