>From the graph, it seems to me that for 0-600 sec wake up latency, QNX has a delay of .001846-.001847 sec, while for Linux for the same 0-600 sec wake up latency, Linux has a delay of .001840-001849. I am not sure how to interpret these graphs, but it looks to me like QNX is quicker at "waking up", while Linux has much greater variation in response. Is this interpretation correct? And is the difference significant for actual real-time behavior?
Pablo Manalastas --- Eduardo Tongson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > A bit OT. Two years ago I compared Linux, > DragonFlyBSD, NetBSD, > OpenBSD and QNX nanosleep() accuracy [1]. I'm not > sure if there are > any significant improvements with Linux nanosleep(). > I didn't use real > time patches on Linux because I wanted to test bare > kernels. > > <http://leaf.dragonflybsd.org/~ed/misc/nanosleep/> > _________________________________________________ Philippine Linux Users' Group (PLUG) Mailing List [email protected] (#PLUG @ irc.free.net.ph) Read the Guidelines: http://linux.org.ph/lists Searchable Archives: http://archives.free.net.ph
