On Tue, Jan 16, 2001 at 08:38:30AM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> You could have asked me: aside from getting wierd OS failures (which is
> always fun) there is a really interesting area in which "soft" realtime
> applications interact with hard realtime applications: e.g. hard RT
> collects frames, feeds them to a soft RT which does some mixing, and hard
> RT outputs.
> I think that the area in which hard and soft RT cooperate is one of the most
> important research&development areas in OS.
I stand humbled. My apologies if I seemed overly negative towards the
question of using the low latency patch. It's just that it seems like
applications that require low latency could be deftly handled by using hard
real time, and the low latency patch has a lot of provisos for its use. There
was much discussion on the Linux kernel list about the issues that the low
latency patch raised. While many people said that it Worked For Them(tm), it
looked like the patch would not be compatible with many drivers and perhaps
even platforms (did anyone ever test the patch on anything besides ia32?).
However, if you get the low latency patch and our RTLinux patch to
apply cleanly and work, all the more power to you. I'd be interested to hear
how it works out.
-- [rtl] ---
To unsubscribe:
echo "unsubscribe rtl" | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] OR
echo "unsubscribe rtl <Your_email>" | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
For more information on Real-Time Linux see:
http://www.rtlinux.org/rtlinux/
