On Fri, 2005-04-08 at 05:12 -0400, Jean-Marc Valin wrote:
> Right now, Con's patch does 1 and 3, while Ingo's does 1 and 2 (though
> Con says Ingo's patch could also do 3).
Ingo's patch allows 3 to be done in userspace, by an "RT watchdog"
process that runs as root, and wakes occasionally to check for runaway
RT tasks & kill or demote them.
> Would people here be happy with
> any of those and try to convince kernel developers that there's really a
> need for real-time (some still aren't convinced) and that one of these
> solution is acceptable?
>
I think they are already convinced. It looks like Ingo's solution will
get merged (it's in -mm already).
Con's solution is considered "better" but too intrusive to merge anytime
soon.
Lee
Received on Sat Apr 9 00:15:07 2005
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Sat Apr 09 2005 - 00:15:08 EEST