Re: patent on O_ATOMICLOOKUP [Re: [PATCH] loopable tmpfs (2.4.17)]

[Erik Andersen <andersen@codepoet.org>]

On Sun May 26, 2002 at 07:31:36AM +0200, Robert Schwebel wrote:
> On Sat, May 25, 2002 at 06:48:53PM -0600, Erik Andersen wrote:
> > So now we have a full 3D model of the robot, the non-liner model
> > of the robot PID-gain space, the entire (application specific)
> > workcell model, the robot specific forward and inverse kinematics
> > routines, and the entire trajectory planning subsystem.  And of
> > course we now need the real-time IO subsystem to handle are the
> > thousands of this-and-that sensors (think PLC-type behavior).
> > etc, etc, etc.  All this in the kernel?  Nah...
> 
> People are doing this (or at least something similar) in reality these
> days... :-) 

Oh I know they are.  I was doing all of this stuff while in grad
school back in 1996, and later at my first job I was doing this
stuff too.  Had to use LynxOS back then.  Would have been nice if
we could have used Linux...  I was watching RTLinux closely back
then -- long before the patent problem.  :)

> Hopefully, your post shows clearly why there are users out there who don't
> want to make such complex algorithms open source, and I must say I can
> understand them. 

That was the hope.  So people would understand that this isn't
the type of application where you can just squirrel away the
real-time bits in a device driver...  Its got to be the whole
thing,

 -Erik

--
Erik B. Andersen             http://codepoet-consulting.com/
--This message was written using 73% post-consumer electrons--