> On good hardware, we can easily do much better than 1ms latency with a > preemptible kernel and a spinlock cleanup. I don't think the > limitations of some PC hardware should limit our goals for Linux. Its more than a spinlock cleanup at that point. To do anything useful you have to tackle both priority inversion and some kind of at least semi-formal validation of the code itself. At the point it comes down to validating the code I'd much rather validate rtlinux than the entire kernel Alan - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo _at_ vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Follow-Ups:
- Re: [2.4.17/18pre] VM and swap - it's really unusableRobert Love <rml _at_ tech9.net>
- Re: [2.4.17/18pre] VM and swap - it's really unusableNigel Gamble <nigel _at_ nrg.org>
- Prev by Date: Re: 2.4.17 raid5 checksumming function selection wierdness
- Next by Date: Re: strange kernel message when hacking the NIC driver
- Previous by thread: Re: [2.4.17/18pre] VM and swap - it's really unusable
- Next by thread: Re: [2.4.17/18pre] VM and swap - it's really unusable
- Indexes:[Main][Thread]