Re: preempt rt in commercial use

["Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>]

On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 02:48:19PM +0200, Sergio Ruocco wrote:
> Pradyumna Sampath wrote:
> > I agree. Hard, soft ... far too qualitative for a discussion like
> > this. Numbers, test cases and applications determine different
> > meanings of these words.
> 
> Right. Hard and Soft realtime discussions end up always in useless
> infinite loops. The *applications*' *requirements* are hard or soft.
> 
> These requirements reflect in the OS, the CPU, the IO devices, and more
> typically a convolution of all of them, depending on what the
> application does, i.e., the actual sequence of computations, OS
> syscalls, IO operations and so on...

I did a Linux Journal article on this topic a few years ago:

http://www.linuxjournal.com/article/9361

I also did a portion of a short course on this topic last year:

http://www.rdrop.com/users/paulmck/scalability/paper/ACACES2009/4-LKRT.2009.07.16a.pdf
http://www.rdrop.com/users/paulmck/scalability/paper/ACACES2009/5-AppRT.2009.07.17b.pdf

							Thanx, Paul

> > Top copy a phrase from one of the presentations from dresden.
> 
> Which presentation? I am curious to read it.
> 
> > Real-time need not always be real fast.
> 
> "Real fast is not real-time" is a catchy phrase which comes from this
> very old workshop:
> 
> http://www.langston.com/Papers/uk.pdf
> 
> I used it to motivate an investigation in the real-time properties of a
> "real fast" microkernel:
> 
> http://www.hindawi.com/journals/es/2008/234710.abs.html
> 
> Have fun!
> 
> 	Sergio
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rt-users" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html