Jeff Angielski wrote:
> Gilles Chanteperdrix wrote:
>>> 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
>
> I meant to write PREEMPT_RT is getting closer to hard realtime. Sorry
> for the confusion.
>
> As for the interrupt threads, the advantage is not in the latency, it is
> in the ability to control the scheduling of the handlers. In theory,
> you can schedule your handler the have the highest priority handler.
The real advantage or the threaded interrupts is that the part of the
kernel-space code that need to protect from a particular interrupt
remains preemptible by other interrupts. The interrupt handler
themselves were already preemptible, if they did not use the
IRQF_DISABLED flag.
Note that the same effect could be obtained by disabling only the
particular interrupt at PIC level, but this would have mean a lot more
of code changes than what threaded interrupts need. But probably a lot
less run-time overhead.
--
Gilles.
_______________________________________________
Xenomai-help mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/xenomai-help
