On Fri, 2005-04-08 at 10:32, Lee Revell wrote: > 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).
Hmmm, I'm getting really confused, I thought that the realtime lsm was the one that was in 'mm (maybe none of them are?). Finally I found the followup article on lwn that mentioned this: http://lwn.net/Articles/121887/ "...The end result is that the rlimit patch has come back out of -mm..." Maybe it was put back again afterwards? (this was reported on February 10). Hard to follow all that's happening... -- Fernando