From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Sujit Karataparambil Subject: Re: Re: Re: Ethernet communication from real time thread Date: Thu, 30 Apr 2009 17:05:32 +0530 Message-ID: <921ca19c0904300435v39df310bk517ed841cf2a7318@mail.gmail.com> References: <20308172.1241074857487.JavaMail.ngmail@webmail19.ha2.local> <921ca19c0904300229g47889c67yedd3aa4acb73b20d@mail.gmail.com> <14844227.1241088061552.JavaMail.ngmail@webmail12.arcor-online.net> <921ca19c0904300404x5193a9d0s1c52c688826d7912@mail.gmail.com> <438094.1241090250891.JavaMail.ngmail@webmail11.arcor-online.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE To: "M. Koehrer" , linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org Return-path: Received: from wf-out-1314.google.com ([209.85.200.172]:63031 "EHLO wf-out-1314.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1762988AbZD3Lfd convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Thu, 30 Apr 2009 07:35:33 -0400 Received: by wf-out-1314.google.com with SMTP id 26so1329746wfd.4 for ; Thu, 30 Apr 2009 04:35:32 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <438094.1241090250891.JavaMail.ngmail@webmail11.arcor-online.net> Sender: linux-rt-users-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: > now I got your point! > I think I did not tell it clearly: > I want to replace a running Xenomai/RTNET approach by completely > using the RT_PREEMPT patch. I do not want to do any mix of Xenomai an= d RT_PREEMPT. > The target is to have a RT_PREEMPT only system that performs similar = to the Xenomai/rtnet > approach. What you mean to say is the pthread library. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/POSIX_Threads http://www.net.t-labs.tu-berlin.de/~gregor/tools/pthread-scheduling.htm= l How will you replace Xenomai/RTNET Completely. You don't even know how it behaves with RT_PREEMPT patch. Also why do you think it necessary to have an common guide line on Priorities on thread's. I dont think they follow any standard on thi= s regard. =46or Example QT might be following some other Thread Priority standard in regards to number of levels, thread nomenclature etc. > Sorry for any confusion here... > > Thus, the concrete question (in short) is: > - Which (user/kernel) threads (prio, affinity) are relevant for using= Ethernet (UDP/IP) communication > with the RT_PREEMPT patch. you could look up these articles. based on what i have discussed. http://lists.trolltech.com/qt-interest/2007-05/thread00746-0.html On Thu, Apr 30, 2009 at 4:47 PM, M. Koehrer = wrote: > Hi Sujit, > > now I got your point! > I think I did not tell it clearly: > I want to replace a running Xenomai/RTNET approach by completely > using the RT_PREEMPT patch. I do not want to do any mix of Xenomai an= d RT_PREEMPT. > The target is to have a RT_PREEMPT only system that performs similar = to the Xenomai/rtnet > approach. > > Sorry for any confusion here... > > Thus, the concrete question (in short) is: > - Which (user/kernel) threads (prio, affinity) are relevant for using= Ethernet (UDP/IP) communication > with the RT_PREEMPT patch. > >> I think you have a point it certainly needs to be checked whether >> the RT_PREEMPT patch behaves with an package like Xenomai. >> My initial reaction is just that in the case of Xenomai, it just app= lies >> an Hard Real time constraint on the RT_PREEMPT patch. >> >> But it is certainly much better to investigate what happens when we >> have an Xenomai like RT System behave otherwise. Does it change >> the RT_PREEMPT patch. >> > > Regards > > Mathias > > -- > Mathias Koehrer > mathias_koehrer@arcor.de > > > Arcor.de Gaming Area - kostenfrei daddeln bis der Arzt kommt! > Jetzt checken und aus =FCber 80 Spielen w=E4hlen! > http://www.arcor.de/footer-gaming/ > --=20 -- Sujit K M -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rt-user= s" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html