Re: Why is Linux not RTOS?

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

> Why is Linux kernel considered a (hard) realtime OS? I already
> understand the basic reason is that the linux kernel does not
> guarantee that a task will be completed on time. But I would
> appreciate answers in terms of more of kernel jargons.
> What stops us from classifying kernel as hard RTOS? Is it because at
> times the kernel is non-preemptive (for e.g. while holding spinlocks)?
> Has it got something to do with interrupt latency / scheduling latency
> etc?
> Is the behaviour of the kernel (when it is preemptive) similar to hard
> real time OS ??

>From what I've read, the preemption in the kernel is mostly a hack because 
nobody's found a way to reduce the latency of certain long functions yet.

And there is a separate RTOS version called Real-Time Linux or RTL...I 
think. Try googling. It's used in life-support machinery and so forth.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-newbie" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

[Site Home]     [Audio]     [Hams]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Memory]     [Security]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Yosemite Photos]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Samba]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux Resources]     [Fedora Users]

  Powered by Linux