Re: a joint letter on low latency and Linux

[Bill Huey]

> I and others have pointed out that if you need hard real time then
> what you do is use RT Linux and you can get exactly what you need.
> I've heard two arguments against this:
> 
> a) ``Other operating systems offer "soft realtime" and we don't want to
>    port our code from that to the RT Linux model.''  Translation:
....
> 
> b) ``If we take the RT Linux path then Linus will never add the low latency
>    features we want.''  I love this argument.  It implies knowledge that there
>    is a better way, that if you use the better way then there is no need to do
>    what Linus doesn't really want to do.  Exactly.
> 
> In fairness to the low latency application people, I think that the
> RT Linux folks need to provide skeleton "apps" that show how to solve
> problems in the RT Linux space.  Whether that happens or not, the RT Linux

Larry McVoy,

Then you fundamentally misunderstand the nature of audio and various
media programming. These folks, including me need to have a reliable
jitter free process model from the deepest points in the kernel to
userspace... Including the ability to handle lots of floating point
operations through out that path.

Some of those things can be compartimentalized, but only in very
limited ways.

bill