From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752036AbWFLPZ5 (ORCPT ); Mon, 12 Jun 2006 11:25:57 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752038AbWFLPZ5 (ORCPT ); Mon, 12 Jun 2006 11:25:57 -0400 Received: from mustang.oldcity.dca.net ([216.158.38.3]:1439 "HELO mustang.oldcity.dca.net") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1752036AbWFLPZ5 (ORCPT ); Mon, 12 Jun 2006 11:25:57 -0400 Subject: Re: Good performance (hard realtime ??) on 2.6.16 patched with patch-2.6.16-rt29 from Ingo Molnar From: Lee Revell To: Felix Oxley Cc: kernel@wolff-online.nl, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: References: <20060612095008.21733.qmail@www.wolff-online.nl> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 11:26:03 -0400 Message-Id: <1150125964.22720.40.camel@mindpipe> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.6.1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 2006-06-12 at 11:12 +0100, Felix Oxley wrote: > (Regarding Hard Real Time, my understanding is that that depends on a > _guarantee_ that the system will always be able to produce the > 'result' within the required interval. Ingo's -rt patches may give > exceedingly good responsiveness but they offer no guarantees, so they > cannot be considered Hard Real Time) The -rt kernel is capable of hard realtime, modulo any bugs, but no one has yet done an analysis of the few non-preemptible code paths to determine what guarantees it can make. Lee