linux-kernel - Re: [RFC patch 0/5] genirq: add infrastructure for threaded interrupt handlers

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.1.10.0810021520560.2919@gandalf.stny.rr.com>
Date:	Thu, 2 Oct 2008 15:23:59 -0400 (EDT)
From:	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To:	Daniel Walker <dwalker@...sta.com>
cc:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...l.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Arjan van de Veen <arjan@...radead.org>,
	Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
	Jon Masters <jonathan@...masters.org>,
	Sven Dietrich <sdietrich@...e.de>
Subject: Re: [RFC patch 0/5] genirq: add infrastructure for threaded interrupt
 handlers


On Thu, 2 Oct 2008, Daniel Walker wrote:

> On Thu, 2008-10-02 at 20:42 +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> 
> > Clearly you have neither clue about real time nor about operating
> > systems in general. 
> 
> Here we go again Thomas.. You think you can have a conversation without
> the insults for once?
> 
> > Solaris, some BSDs and MacOSX use interrupt threads. Where exactly is
> > the relation to realtime?
> 
> The very fact that you mention it in your release notes .. You mention
> the type of system in "preempt-rt" and the advantage of your system..
> 
> > The concept of interrupt threads is nothing which is in any way
> > related to real time. It is a well known and pretty old concept in
> > operating system design.
> > 
> > The fact that real time operating systems benefit from interrupt
> > threads is a totally different topic.
> > 
> 
> The fact that a direct relationship exists means that any threaded
> interrupt system needs to take into account the inevitable connection to
> real time since it will be used in that system as a core component.. If
> you can't effectively achieve real time with your system , than that's a
> problem that needs to be addressed. 

Daniel, what kind of logic is this? I was already accused of being on 
crack today (but was just too much coffee). Perhaps you might be the one 
that's on crack.

I build a pipe. There exists a relationship between a pipe and crap 
running through it from my toilet. Does this mean that every time I need a 
pipe, that I need to take into account the inevitable connection to crap 
to run through it?

God, I can see the problems with my gas lines.

-- Steve

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/