Montavista's "Open Source Real-Time Linux Project" again

Karim Yaghmour karim at
Thu Oct 14 20:13:56 CEST 2004

Gilles Chanteperdrix wrote:
> I do not see where this argument lead us: the same is true for RTAI, and
> I suspect many people are using RTAI without having done a mathematical
> proof of the correctness of its code. People generally assume that their
> system is not so strange that running it under heavy load for a few
> hours (or days) will not let the hot spots appear. This may look
> frightening for people leaving in the dream world of theory, but
> concretely, it does not work that bad, and this is actually the approach
> used for many "industrial" products, like medicine, cars, genetically
> modified food, etc...

Except that RTAI was designed with hard-rt in mind, and if people did
want to go ahead and show that it is deterministic, they can. That's
the difference.

> As for Montavista announce, it has two sides, the marketing side, which
> is not RTAI project's business, and the technical side which is rather
> good news. It shows some interest for Ingo Molnar's work, and make it
> more likely to be included (even if partially) in Linux.
> After all, applications using LXRT or Fusion use Linux calls, this is
> what these technologies are all about. Such applications hence benefit
> from any Linux responsiveness improvement.

There is no dispute of whether latency is good or not, it certainly is
good. But there's a difference between reducing latency, and claiming
to somehow provide hard-rt in Linux.

Author, Speaker, Developer, Consultant
Pushing Embedded and Real-Time Linux Systems Beyond the Limits || karim at || 1-866-677-4546

More information about the Rtai mailing list