From: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
To: Pavel Pisa <pisa@cmp.felk.cvut.cz>
Cc: Sunil Naidu <akula2.shark@gmail.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Realtime-preemption for 2.6.20-rc5 ?
Date: Sun, 21 Jan 2007 10:10:38 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1169370638.6197.175.camel@twins> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200701210039.27284.pisa@cmp.felk.cvut.cz>
On Sun, 2007-01-21 at 00:39 +0100, Pavel Pisa wrote:
> Hello Sunil and Ingo,
>
> Date: 2007-01-20 02:56:40 GMT (20 hours and 26 minutes ago)
> > 2007-01-20, Sunil Naidu <akula2.shark@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I did refer the same. Is it necessary to use only base kernel, say
> > 2.6.19? Or, can I go ahead with 2.6.19 + 2.6.19.2 patch + 2.6.19-rt
> > patch?
> >
> > If yes, any reason why we need to apply rt patch only to a base kernel?
>
> according to my observation 2.6.19-rt15 is based/includes 2.6.19.1 changes.
>
> But there has been that nasty clear_page_dirty_for_io() bug causing
> corruption of ext3. Even that I have tested more 2.6.20-rc + rt,
> I preffer
> to stay on "stable" kernel on boxes which I use daily until next stable
> appears.
This is a very weird statement, the -rt kernel includes so much
experimental work it cannot be called 'stable' by a long shot.
Sure its not known unstable, but neither is .20-rc5.
If you want -rt, just run with the latest unless you have a very
specific need not to.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-01-21 9:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-01-20 23:39 Pavel Pisa
2007-01-21 9:10 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2007-01-21 12:44 ` Pavel Pisa
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2007-01-18 10:15 Sunil Naidu
2007-01-18 10:19 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-01-20 2:56 ` Sunil Naidu
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1169370638.6197.175.camel@twins \
--to=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=akula2.shark@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=pisa@cmp.felk.cvut.cz \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®