Re: RT patch acceptance

[hui]

On Mon, May 30, 2005 at 02:56:55PM -0400, Karim Yaghmour wrote:
> Which gets up back where we began: drivers that are non-deterministic
> will continue being deterministic regardless of what solution is adopted,
> if any, and will be in need of a re-write/major-modification, which
> itself will have little or no added value for non-rters ...

>From my memory DRM drivers have direct path to the vertical retrace
through the current ioctl() interface. It's not an issue for that driver
and probably many others that use simple syscalls like that.

The RT patch isn't hard to maintain and only one jerk-off objected to
it without providing any useful information why the single kernel
approach is faulty other than it jars his easily offended sensibilities

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/