Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 7 Jul 1999 14:13:53 +0200 (MEST) | Subject | Re: Can't sleep less than 20 ms | From | Bernd Paysan <> |
| |
Seve Underwood wrote: > Yes the documents are poor. They should be more detailed, and fully describe what > the system does. However, they should actually be describing what happens now. Just > *think* instead of complaining. It can't be better than it is.
I don't accept that. gettimeofday() knows pretty good where inside the tick period the system is. Rounding up to the next tick (instead of rounding up the delta to the tick accuracy, and then rounding up to the next tick - double rounding to me) is possible, and would allow to have a 0-10 ms sleep period, too. It's not just a single line like deleting a + 1 in case timeout is not zero, but I believe it's doable. I'll prepare a patch to prove it.
Linux wasn't written with real time in mind, but this doesn't mean one can't change it to meet real time requirements better than it does now. After all, that's the purpose of free software: when someone wants a feature, he can implement it (and BTW, that's one of the reasons why I don't want to use VxWorks or QNX ;-). KURT (http://hegel.ittc.ukans.edu/projects/kurt/) is a realtime patch for Linux, so things are doable.
-- Bernd Paysan "If you want it done right, you have to do it yourself" http://www.jwdt.com/~paysan/
Sent through Global Message Exchange - http://www.gmx.net
- 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/
| |