Re: [PATCH] [request for inclusion] Realtime LSM

Chris Friesen
2005-01-11T20:20:11Z

Jack O'Quin wrote:
> Matt Mackall <mpm@selenic.com> writes:

>>Thankfully a buffer underrun is no more fatal for pro audio than a
>>broken guitar string. CDs skip, DATs glitch, XLR cables flake out,
>>circuit breakers trip, amps clip, Powerbooks crash, and the show goes
>>on. I've done more than enough stage tech to know it's a huge pain in
>>the ass, but let's stop pretending we require absolute perfection,
>>please.

> In _practice_, Ingo's patches are considerably better than what you
> seem to consider "good enough for mere audio work".

I don't see anywere that Matt was criticising Ingo's work. He just said
that it wasn't hard realtime--which is true.

A hard realtime system will *guarantee* that the deadlines will be met,
*no matter what*. It makes all kinds of other sacrifices to do it, and
it makes additional demands on the application designer as well.

I don't think Ingo would claim that his patches make Linux a hard RT
operating system.

Chris