On 9/2/11 2:09 PM, Michael Büsch wrote:
> On Fri, 2 Sep 2011 00:55:54 +0200
> Luka Perkov wrote:
>
>> Also in linux-2.6.39.4/kernel/Kconfig.preempt you will see for
>> CONFIG_PREEMPT:
>>
>> Select this if you are building a kernel for a desktop or
>> embedded system with latency require
On Sun, 04 Sep 2011 10:11:08 -0700
Philip Prindeville wrote:
> > And finally, I'm not really convinced that any of the routers/APs
> > that OpenWRT supports have "latency requirements in the milliseconds range".
> > I'd rather say throughput matters a _lot_ more than a millisecond of latency
> > f
On Sun, 4 Sep 2011 01:06:02 +0200
Luka Perkov wrote:
> > What are you actually trying to fix with enabling preemption? I didn't
> > really get it by reading your mail.
>
> Kernel oops that I described.
Yeah. And that is completely unacceptable.
> CONFIG_PREEMPT must be enabled; don't know what
On 9/4/11 11:43 AM, Michael Büsch wrote:
> On Sun, 04 Sep 2011 10:11:08 -0700
> Philip Prindeville wrote:
>>> And finally, I'm not really convinced that any of the routers/APs
>>> that OpenWRT supports have "latency requirements in the milliseconds range".
>>> I'd rather say throughput matters a _
On Sun, Sep 04, 2011 at 08:47:46PM +0200, Michael Büsch wrote:
> On Sun, 4 Sep 2011 01:06:02 +0200
> Luka Perkov wrote:
> > > What are you actually trying to fix with enabling preemption? I didn't
> > > really get it by reading your mail.
> >
> > Kernel oops that I described.
>
> Yeah. And that
