Jeff Angielski wrote: > Adrien LECOINTRE wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I've been testing for a while, Xenomai and Linux preempt RT latencies >> under different loads and I couldn't find any big differences. Latencies >> are almost the same. >> So my question is, do you know any case where Xenomai is really better >> than a simple preempt RT? >> Or which specification in a real time application should make me chose >> Xenomai instead of preempt RT? > > I suspect your loads are not sufficiently exercising your system. > > To answer your question, though, it all depends on your requirements, > whether you need hard or soft realtime. In other words, is it ok to > miss your deadline every so often? If so, CONFIG_PREEMPT would be fine > for you. If you can't miss any deadlines, use Xenomai. > > Of course, just by choosing to use Xenomai, you don't get hard realtime. > You still need to design your system and software correctly. > > As time marches on, the CONFIG_PREEMPT is getting closer to hard > realtime, especially with the interrupt threading, but I don't think > that time is now.
threaded interrupts are no silver bullet, they are essentially replacing interrupt latencies with kernel-space scheduling latencies; on x86, this may not make that much of a difference, but on low-end platform it does. See also: https://mail.gna.org/public/xenomai-help/2008-05/msg00043.html https://mail.gna.org/public/xenomai-help/2009-06/msg00005.html -- Gilles. _______________________________________________ Xenomai-help mailing list [email protected] https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/xenomai-help
