From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S268177AbUJMFMq (ORCPT ); Wed, 13 Oct 2004 01:12:46 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S268206AbUJMFMq (ORCPT ); Wed, 13 Oct 2004 01:12:46 -0400 Received: from fw.osdl.org ([65.172.181.6]:63133 "EHLO mail.osdl.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S268177AbUJMFMo (ORCPT ); Wed, 13 Oct 2004 01:12:44 -0400 Message-ID: <416CB85A.7030309@osdl.org> Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2004 22:08:42 -0700 From: "Randy.Dunlap" User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.8 (X11/20040913) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Lee Revell CC: Albert Cahalan , Con Kolivas , linux-kernel mailing list , ankitjain1580@yahoo.com, Ingo Molnar , rml@tech9.net Subject: Re: Difference in priority References: <1097542651.2666.7860.camel@cube> <1097630263.2674.9508.camel@cube> <1097643510.1553.120.camel@krustophenia.net> In-Reply-To: <1097643510.1553.120.camel@krustophenia.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Lee Revell wrote: > On Tue, 2004-10-12 at 21:17, Albert Cahalan wrote: > >>I can't see why the RT priority range would be increased. >>It's overkill already, especially since Linux doesn't have >>priority inheritance. Since POSIX requires 32 levels, that >>is the right number. Actually using more than one level >>(remember: NO priority inheritance) might not be wise. > > > Linux will probably have priority inheritance soon. See the "Real Time > Kernel" thread. Is that opinion based any on this article and Linus's comments in it? http://news.com.com/A+new+direction+for+Linux+for+gadgets/2100-7344_3-5406291.html?tag=cd.top -- ~Randy