faux RT and periodicity for multimedia

Rick Hohensee (humbubba@raptor.cqi.com)
Wed, 11 Nov 1998 18:38:10 -0500 (EST)

>Rik van Riel writes:
> > In my view, RT tasks really should have absolute
> > priority over non-RT tasks and static priority
> > within it's own class.
>
>You know, what's sad about this continued debate about "RT" is
>that there is a persistent failure to understand that
>"real-time", as it is conventionally used, means "guaranteed
>response time". It does not mean "ASAP scheduling" or "minimum
>scheduling latency". There are inherent conflicts between
>real-time and timesharing that are not easy, or maybe not even
>possible, to resolve.
>

What is possible in terms of periodic fast services?

What I have seen in this regard is AmigaDos, which had a
handful of fast services every video horizontal sync, and then
was single-user multi-tasking for the balance of the period.
This isn't true RT, but periodic stuff ( like feeding the
native audio DACs) appeared to be right quick.

"Songs in the key of NTSC"

Rick Hohensee http://cqi.com/~humbubba
colorg on EFnet IRC #linux chanop
cLIeNUX xart kandinski cycluphonics ratioles Md., USA
This is your brain on colorg --> (@#*%@#() <---~~~_()()(
Any questions?

-
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/