> At the other end of the scale we have microsecond latencies that some
> control applications need. That is hard to achieve with a kernel that
> is not specifically engineered to have low latencies with the trade
> off that interactive and batch work is penalized.
>
Agreed, but I don't think that this is the point of RT.
RT isn't about whether we can or can't do something. If something
can't be done (tech wise), history shows that technology will improve
until it can. What RT is about is the GUARANTEE that something can or
can't
be done, based on a set of parameters that are associated with each
task.
>
> Wether or not it is called real-time is besides the point. It all
> depends on how you really define real-time.
>
Sounds like Bill Clinton :)
Jesse C Cronce
-
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/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Jul 23 2000 - 21:00:13 EST