Re: RT patch acceptance

[hui]

On Sat, May 28, 2005 at 07:55:00AM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> You're on crack as usual, but today you go much too far.  XFS doesn't
> ahave anything to do with you're so Hard RT pipedreams.  The so-called
> 'RT' subvolulme only provides a more determinitistic block allocator.
> GRIO doesn't require any RT guarantees, it's entirely about I/O scheduling
> and has been ported to various operating systems with sane locking semantics.

I actually when I talked to the SGI folks about 5 years ago at Usenix
I got a different story where they really were thinking about hacking
a tasklet to handle some of this IO stuff going. So I'm going to bet
that you're wrong about this based on that conversation.

The combination of this and RT apps that use it require some kind of
RT guarantees. I've had a number of conversation with SGI folks that
have stated this.

And notice your jumpy comments doesn't dillute any of the things I've
pointed out whether you understand it or not.

bill

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/