On Sunday 23 January 2005 06:31, Ingo Molnar wrote: >* andyliu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> hi , ingo >> >> i am trying to understand your patch,but the patch file is so long >> and complex. i am wondering is there some documents about your >> patch? >> >> :) > >well, it mainly offers the PREEMPT_RT feature, which is a 'no >compromises' variant of kernel preemption: virtually everything >(including normal spinlocked sections) is preemptable, with the goal > of providing hard-realtime category ~10-20 usecs maximum scheduling > latency guarantees on a typical PC (or embedded platform). Those > long and complex changes are almost all needed to achieve this > goal. > >this tree is mainly an experiment to see what it takes to achieve > that latency goal, and to see how much of that can go upstream > (without having to decide whether upstream wants to have the > PREEMPT_RT feature or not). (A couple of dozen patches were already > split out of this patch and are in the current upstream kernel - > they already made a latency difference for the 2.6.10 kernel.) > > Ingo
Hijacking the thread here Ingo, but did you see my build failure message of yesterday? -- Cheers, Gene "There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order." -Ed Howdershelt (Author) 99.32% setiathome rank, not too shabby for a WV hillbilly Yahoo.com attorneys please note, additions to this message by Gene Heskett are: Copyright 2005 by Maurice Eugene Heskett, all rights reserved. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
