Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 26 Feb 1999 11:56:14 +0000 | From | Neil Conway <> | Subject | Re: [offtopic] Re: 2.2.2: 2 thumbs up from lm |
| |
Albert D. Cahalan wrote: > > Neil Conway writes: > > Richard B. Johnson wrote: > > >> Now, where does it say anything about "bounded latencies". By what > >> authority? Since I defined realtime, I would like to know how > >> an additional definition got appended to destroy the concept. > > > > I think we're on different wavelengths: "realtime" does have a meaning > > outside any definition you choose for it. I'm used to a particular > > definition for "realtime", and of course if we use yours then my > > comments are meaningless. > > We must use his if you won't post yours.
I thought I did - "bounded latency" is the heart of it. Maybe I'm the one that's out of step with the rest of the world ;-))
This is now rather a long way off topic, so I think I'll be dropping it.
> > > But how can you promise the customer that your system will respond to > > events while they are current if you DON'T control the latency? > > You must be building your own motherboards, right? You can not make > honest promises with hardware that might frequently retry to hide > error conditions from the OS. The BIOS could even use a system management > mode to steal cycles. > > I think this whole argument is silly. The goal should be "improve". > There is no perfection. Think in terms of histograms with infinitely > long tails that need to be squished as flat as possible. Every bit > of improvement is useful -- maybe Linux goes from 5000 ruined CDs/year > to 4352 ruined CDs/year. Good.
Lest I mislead anyone about my meaning: I personally would not attempt "real" aka "hard" aka "realtime" realtime on a vanilla Linux box (at least not if I cared about the outcome ;-)). I was addressing a generic RT point, and that's why I'm going to drop it...
Neil
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |