From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261940AbVFWA6q (ORCPT ); Wed, 22 Jun 2005 20:58:46 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261941AbVFWA6q (ORCPT ); Wed, 22 Jun 2005 20:58:46 -0400 Received: from opersys.com ([64.40.108.71]:17682 "EHLO www.opersys.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261940AbVFWA6j (ORCPT ); Wed, 22 Jun 2005 20:58:39 -0400 Message-ID: <42BA0BCA.6020903@opersys.com> Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2005 21:09:30 -0400 From: Karim Yaghmour Reply-To: karim@opersys.com Organization: Opersys inc. User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7.2) Gecko/20040805 Netscape/7.2 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, fr, fr-be, fr-ca, fr-fr MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Bill Huey (hui)" CC: Ingo Molnar , Kristian Benoit , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, paulmck@us.ibm.com, andrea@suse.de, tglx@linutronix.de, pmarques@grupopie.com, bruce@andrew.cmu.edu, nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au, ak@muc.de, sdietrich@mvista.com, dwalker@mvista.com, hch@infradead.org, akpm@osdl.org, rpm@xenomai.org Subject: Re: PREEMPT_RT vs I-PIPE: the numbers, part 2 References: <1119287612.6863.1.camel@localhost> <20050620183115.GA27028@nietzsche.lynx.com> <42B98B20.7020304@opersys.com> <20050622192927.GA13817@nietzsche.lynx.com> <20050622200554.GA16119@elte.hu> <42B9CC98.1040402@opersys.com> <20050622220428.GA28906@elte.hu> <42B9F673.4040100@opersys.com> <20050623000607.GB11486@elte.hu> <42BA069D.20208@opersys.com> <20050623005538.GA3348@nietzsche.lynx.com> In-Reply-To: <20050623005538.GA3348@nietzsche.lynx.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Bill Huey (hui) wrote: > He's probably confusing you from the real FUDers. I don't see you > as a FUDer. Thanks, I appreciate the vote of confidence. > He's just resentful fighting with you over attention from the same > batch of strippers at last years OLS. :) But I don't want to "fight" Ingo. There would just be no point whatsoever with "fighting" with one the best developers Linux has. I started my involvement in these recent threads with a very clear statement that I was open to being shown wrong in having exclusively championed the nanokernel approach in the past. I set out to show myself wrong with these tests and beside some vague expectations, I truely didn't know what I was going to find. I certainly wouldn't have bet a hot-dog on preempt_rt coming neck-to-neck with the ipipe on interrupt latency ... So yes, in doing so some results I've found aren't that nice. But, hell, I didn't invent those results. They are there for anyone to repdroduce or contradict. I have no monopoly over LMbench, PC hardware, the Linux kernel, or anything else used to get those numbers. Karim -- Author, Speaker, Developer, Consultant Pushing Embedded and Real-Time Linux Systems Beyond the Limits http://www.opersys.com || karim@opersys.com || 1-866-677-4546