On Sat, 25 May 2002, Robert Schwebel wrote:
> >
> > Which is, in my opinion, the only sane way to handle hard realtime. No
> > confusion about priority inversions, no crap. Clear borders between what
> > is "has to happen _now_" and "this can do with the regular soft realtime".
>
> ... which in turn results in the situation that applications must be
> implemented as kernel modules.
That's a load of bull.
It results in the fact that you need to have a _clear_interface_ between
the hard realtime parts, and the stuff that isn't.
Yes, that does imply a certain amount of good design. And it requires you
to understand which parts are time-critical, and which aren't.
> This is only correct for open-loop applications. Most real life apps are
> closed-loop.
Most real life apps have nothing to do with hard-RT.
Linus
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri May 31 2002 - 22:00:15 EST