Re: Dumb question on embedded Linux - why?
From: Drily Lit Raga (midicad2001_at_yahoo.com)
Date: 10/15/05
- Next message: Anton Erasmus: "Re: Recommand ARM Emulator / Demo board"
- Previous message: J Jackson: "Re: Recommand ARM Emulator / Demo board"
- In reply to: Grant Edwards: "Re: Dumb question on embedded Linux - why?"
- Next in thread: Grant Edwards: "Re: Dumb question on embedded Linux - why?"
- Reply: Grant Edwards: "Re: Dumb question on embedded Linux - why?"
- Reply: giangiammy_at_gmail.com: "Re: Dumb question on embedded Linux - why?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: 15 Oct 2005 10:52:52 -0700
Grant Edwards wrote:
> On 2005-10-15, Drily Lit Raga <midicad2001@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >> 2) It's not real-time?
>
> Linux doesn't guarantee latencies between events and the
> handling of those events. The latencies caused by the kernel
> have been greatly improved recently, but it's still not
> suitable for hard, low-latency, real-time projects.
But it still gets used in "real-time" applications, being "good enough"
because a modern-day CPU has plenty of raw speed. Of course if you
want that on a PIC I don't know....
- Next message: Anton Erasmus: "Re: Recommand ARM Emulator / Demo board"
- Previous message: J Jackson: "Re: Recommand ARM Emulator / Demo board"
- In reply to: Grant Edwards: "Re: Dumb question on embedded Linux - why?"
- Next in thread: Grant Edwards: "Re: Dumb question on embedded Linux - why?"
- Reply: Grant Edwards: "Re: Dumb question on embedded Linux - why?"
- Reply: giangiammy_at_gmail.com: "Re: Dumb question on embedded Linux - why?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]