On Fri, 2005-04-08 at 05:12 -0400, Jean-Marc Valin wrote: > Right now, Con's patch does 1 and 3, while Ingo's does 1 and 2 (though > Con says Ingo's patch could also do 3).
Ingo's patch allows 3 to be done in userspace, by an "RT watchdog" process that runs as root, and wakes occasionally to check for runaway RT tasks & kill or demote them. > Would people here be happy with > any of those and try to convince kernel developers that there's really a > need for real-time (some still aren't convinced) and that one of these > solution is acceptable? > I think they are already convinced. It looks like Ingo's solution will get merged (it's in -mm already). Con's solution is considered "better" but too intrusive to merge anytime soon. Lee