Linux-kernel mailing list archive 2000-26,: Re: a joint letter on low latency and Linux

# Re: a joint letter on low latency and Linux

Roman Zippel (zippel@fh-brandenburg.de)
Fri, 30 Jun 2000 20:14:18 +0200 (MET DST)

- Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
- Next message: H. Peter Anvin: "Re: It's time to get rid of zImage"
- Previous message: Pete Toscano: "xfree and devel kernels > 2.3.99-pre6"

Hi,

> > It will have about the same overhead as running a RTLinux kernel only that
> > better latency is also available to user space.
>
> Nope, you need a lot more locks in kernel structures (all spin_lock which
> are noop ATM on UP will cost you)

1. Most of the time irq save spinlocks are used, these are not cheap under
RTLinux as well.
2. Since ages I have some atomic macros pending, that could make a few
spinlocks obsolete.

bye, Roman

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

- Next message: H. Peter Anvin: "Re: It's time to get rid of zImage"
- Previous message: Pete Toscano: "xfree and devel kernels > 2.3.99-pre6"