[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> I agree that you found a bug, I disagree that you will ever get 100% timing
> correctness from Linux except at the cost of making the kernel unmaintainable.
>
> Furthermore, if you do similar timing tests on VxWorks, Win-CE, and etc, I bet
> you will find that 100 milliseconds is not impossible.
> Note that even QNX quotes "typical" interrupt latency times.
>
> --
Really, I have no arguments here.
I believe in a combined approach towards adopting the standard Linux
into
embedded systems :
1. if a timing problem can be fixed at no or minimal cost for both
desktop systems and embedded systems, fix it in the main branch.
2. if a timing problem must be fixed for embedded systems, but may not
be beneficial to desktop systems, document the knowledge and maintain
patches (tedious work, but you get other benefits for using Linux)
3. if there is no good fix, document the knowledge and avoid the timing
problem
in application/system level. (Or you can use RTLinux. :-))
The lost need_resched flag to me falls into 1).
Jun
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
