Re: [RFC] Scheduler issue 1, RT tasks ...

Martin Knoblauch
2001-12-28T09:52:56Z

> Re: [RFC] Scheduler issue 1, RT tasks ...
>
> >
> > Right, that was my question. George says, in your words, "for better
>
> > standards compliancy ..." and I want to know why you guys think
> that.
>
> The thought was that if someone need RT tasks he probably need a very
> low
> latency and so the idea that by applying global preemption decisions
> would
> lead to a better compliancy. But i'll be happy to ear that this is
> false
> anyway ...
>

without wanting to start a RT flame-fest, what do people really want
when they talk about RT in this [Linux] context:

- very low latency
- deterministic latency ("never to exceed")
- both
- something completely different

Thanks
Martin
--
+-----------------------------------------------------+
|Martin Knoblauch |
|-----------------------------------------------------|
|http://www.knobisoft.de/cats |
|-----------------------------------------------------|
|e-mail: knobi@knobisoft.de |
+-----------------------------------------------------+