From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: <43E6861E.3000400@domain.hid> Date: Mon, 06 Feb 2006 00:11:26 +0100 From: Philippe Gerum MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [Xenomai-core] ... the rt-preempt patch once been in fusion References: <43E668EF.4090306@domain.hid> In-Reply-To: <43E668EF.4090306@domain.hid> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit List-Id: "Xenomai life and development \(bug reports, patches, discussions\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Hannes Mayer Cc: xenomai@xenomai.org Hannes Mayer wrote: > Hi all! > > Well, subject says almost all. > I remember there has been an effort to make a fusion/rt-preempt > patch conglomerate back then. > I'm just curious (as I've just been toying with the Molnar > patch) - has that thing been dropped in xeno completely ? > Clearly not, it is still on the project's agenda, but PREEMPT_RT has been too much of a moving target recently, not to speak of the vanilla 2.6 kernel itself. Even if Xeno's core has not changed in the same proportions, a large refactoring has taken place for 2.1 though. Additionally, PREEMPT_RT's infrastructure has evolved a lot since Xeno was first ported over such kernel, and the way to interface both sub-systems likely needs to be re-thought. This combo cannot be done overnight, but I think that we are getting close to point where it would be possible to rework on this issue. This work is likely going to start by a test campaign evaluating PREEMPT_RT's and Xeno's nucleus performances in a series of simple and relevant test cases over different ranges of platforms, so that we could measure up to which point (and under which condition) the real-time spectrum would be widened by using a combination of both. -- Philippe.