14 Feb
2005
14 Feb
'05
6:25 a.m.
Jack O'Quin wrote:
At this point, I'm mainly interested in results using 2.6.11-rc3-mm2,
because that is the exact version Andrew is merging with the mainline
kernel. Only those comfortable with and interested in building
development kernels should try that.
The main reason we asked Andrew to include this LSM in the kernel is
that it's difficult to keep patches working as each new kernel version
comes out. Once in the kernel tree, that happens automatically.
Many kernel developers opposed this. It *is* something of a hack.
But, no one has been able to come up with a better solution, and this
one at least looks safe. I expect it to be replaced by something
better in the 2.8 timeframe.
OK. I'm quite happy with Ingo's RT patch /and/ the realtime-lsm module. I
am currently running 2.6.11-rc4-RT-V0.7.39-01 on my laptop (P4/UP) and on
my desktop (P4/SMP-HT). And this is all about PREEMPT_RT=y.
FYI the realtime-lsm module is now being provided by the broken out patch
from 2.6.11-rc3-mm2, and it builds and works fine, as ever expected :)
To speak the truth :) I can't live without this patch combination anymore.
Its been a long way, not without drawbacks. On my hardware setup, nowadays
I already consider those pretty stable to my standards -- already in
production status to me.
That's mostly why I don't have a point to test on 2.6.11-rc3-mm2, but I
took the rt-lsm.patch from it, if that's of any help.
Cheers.
--
rncbc aka Rui Nuno Capela
rncbc(a)rncbc.org