From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S265291AbUGMOzx (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Jul 2004 10:55:53 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S265292AbUGMOzx (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Jul 2004 10:55:53 -0400 Received: from out007pub.verizon.net ([206.46.170.107]:396 "EHLO out007.verizon.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S265291AbUGMOzu (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Jul 2004 10:55:50 -0400 Message-Id: <200407131455.i6DEtmAo006203@localhost.localdomain> To: "Martijn Sipkema" cc: "The Linux Audio Developers' Mailing List" , florin@sgi.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, albert@users.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: [linux-audio-dev] Re: desktop and multimedia as an afterthought? In-reply-to: Your message of "Tue, 13 Jul 2004 13:09:28 BST." <008501c468d2$405d8c70$161b14ac@boromir> Date: Tue, 13 Jul 2004 10:55:48 -0400 From: Paul Davis X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH at out007.verizon.net from [141.151.61.237] at Tue, 13 Jul 2004 09:55:49 -0500 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org >Thus, the fact that Linux does not support protocols to prevent priority >inversion (please correct me if I am wrong) kind of suggests that supporting >realtime applications is not considered very important. we went through this (you and i in particular) right here on LAD a year or so ago. while i might agree with you about the priority given to RT-ish apps, my recollection of the end of that discussion is that priority inheritance is neither necessary nor sufficient to allow adequate RT performance. priority inversion generally can be factored out through application redesign, and the protocols i've seen to address it are not useful for RT purposes - they just help deadlock. --p