On Sat, 2009-01-24 at 23:02 -0500, Theodore Tso wrote: > I'm not sure exactly how one would do this certification, but I agree > that some kind of "real-time ready" logo/certification program would > make a huge amount of sense, with some standardized metrics of maximum > time spent in an SMI routine, and under what circumstances (in some > cases it occurs every 30-60 minutes; on other cases, only when the CPU > is about to melt itself into slag, or when there are ECC errors, etc.) > There is a huge difference between a system which stops the OS on all > CPU's dead in its tracks for milliseconds once every 45 minutes, > versus one which only triggers an SMI in extreme situations when the > hardware is about to destroy itself. I actually already talked to a certain industry group about a different program but will mention this idea also - some kind of industry notion of "real time platform" probably wouldn't be a bad idea. I'm not sure what the vendors would say/think, but it's probably worth having the discussion anyway. I think we're all right now having to do a lot of legwork in testing/certifying that systems have acceptable latencies. Jon. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rt-users" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
