From: Pavel Pisa <pisa@cmp.felk.cvut.cz>
To: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
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 13:44:05 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200701211344.05853.pisa@cmp.felk.cvut.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1169370638.6197.175.camel@twins>
On Sunday 21 January 2007 10:10, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > 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.
There are no security fixes for rc and our own experience
is, that RT patch has very low impact on base system stability.
The rc-s contains much more experimental stuff all over the
kernel which needs to be stabilized till next (hopefully) stable
release.
> If you want -rt, just run with the latest unless you have a very
> specific need not to.
We have run successfully 2.6.16.1-rt12 over last summer
semester on students diskless stations without much problems.
(Main problem has been some NFS FS problem with 1GB/s server, 100MB/s
stations and switches in between, but it has been same for non-RT kernel.
We solved that by switching NFS over TCP.)
We would like to upgrade to something which would not cause us much
troubles for next course run. We teach real time control in X35POS
course and we need fast responses and timing (100 usec) for direct
PWM and IO control.
On the other hand, I agree that for own experimentation and development
it is better to build on latest released version.
Best wishes
Pavel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-01-21 12:45 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
2007-01-21 12:44 ` Pavel Pisa [this message]
-- 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=200701211344.05853.pisa@cmp.felk.cvut.cz \
--to=pisa@cmp.felk.cvut.cz \
--cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=akula2.shark@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
/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®