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

Karim Yaghmour karim at
Fri Oct 15 16:06:55 CEST 2004

Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> ".. want to go ahead and show that it is deterministic, they can."
> Show ? With a scope ?

At this point you are wasting my cycles. After sending the e-mail, I
was certain you were going to come back with exactly this answer.
I said it was food for thought, I didn't say it was proof of
anything. This and my other argument are not in competition.

> And the scope does what you argued in a LKML thread and what I asked for
> ?

See above.

> "And this has been demonstrated mathematically/algorithmically to be
> true 100% of the time, regardless of the load and the driver set?"
> That's why I was saying "blah". Provide the things yourself to prove
> your point, before asking others to provide them.

Right, again wasting cycles.

> Here are the LibeRTOS/KURT (2.4) numbers on the same machine (300MHZ
> Pentium) compared to RTAI in a long run test:

LiberRt-what? Oh, you mean the long-hyped thing that never actually
came to fruition. You can print out numbers all you want, you have
nowhere nearly as much adoption and as much testing as RTAI.

The point is certainly to provide hard-rt in Linux, and if Ingo's
work does indeed get there (which remains to be proven) then so
be it. Personally, however, I have no plans to waste my time in
non-productive discussions such as this. If you have a bone to
grind with RTAI, please do it in your own spare time.

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