Re: Scheduling Times --- Revisited

Richard Gooch (rgooch@atnf.csiro.au)
Mon, 28 Sep 1998 10:21:19 +1000


Olivier Galibert writes:
> On Sun, Sep 27, 1998 at 11:07:51PM +0200, Rik van Riel wrote:
> > These RT tasks don't have to be real time. Normal timeslicing
> > priorities are good enough if you have the CPU. If you don't
> > you're screwed anyway. Only for audio apps I can see why
> > people want RT (x11amp comes to mind), but for things like
> > video and games you're going to be dependant on the (non-RT)
> > X server so going RT for these tasks is moot.
>
> May I whisper "fbdev" and "GGI" in your ear?

I don't see how they are relevant. The real question is do you really
need RT for these tasks?

Drivers which buffer data (like for the sound cards) can reduce the
demand on the application. If the driver doesn't buffer enough, and
you're recording sound, then an RT application may be justified
(although a normal high priority process may suffice), since you don't
want to loose data.
Playing a video game, however, it might not matter if you loose a
frame or two. The solution to frame dropping may be as simple as
"don't run other things at the same time".

Regards,

Richard....

-
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/