On Tue, 25 Aug 2009, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Tue, 2009-08-25 at 14:03 -0400, Christoph Lameter wrote: > > On Tue, 25 Aug 2009, Mike Galbraith wrote: > > > > > I asked the questions I did out of pure curiosity, and that curiosity > > > has been satisfied. It's not that I find it useless or whatnot (or that > > > my opinion matters to anyone but me;). I personally find the concept of > > > injecting an RTOS into a general purpose OS with no isolation to be > > > alien. Intriguing, but very very alien. > > > > Well lets work on the isolation piece then. We could run a regular process > > on the RT cpu and switch back when OS services are needed? > > Christoph, stop being silly, this offline scheduler thing won't happen, > full stop. Well there are the low latency requirements still. Those need to be addressed in some form. Some of these ideas here are a starting point. > Its not a maintainable solution, it doesn't integrate with existing > kernel infrastructure, and its plain ugly. > > If you want something work within Linux, don't build kernels in kernels > or other such ugly hacks. Ok so how would you go about avoiding the OS noise which motivated the patches for the Offline scheduler? -- 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
