SCIENTIFIC-LINUX-USERS Archives

August 2014

SCIENTIFIC-LINUX-USERS@LISTSERV.FNAL.GOV
Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
Re: about realtime system
From:
Brandon Vincent <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Brandon Vincent <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Sat, 23 Aug 2014 20:20:28 -0700
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (24 lines) 
On Fri, Aug 22, 2014 at 9:41 AM, <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Does it really make difference in timing control comparing to non-realtime
> kernel? Thanks.

Whether or not you need a RTOS depends on your specific needs. Since
you're working with LabVIEW, I would check out their white paper on
the subject.

http://www.ni.com/white-paper/14238/en/

> I don't have NI's realtime system but I am looking for a free linux OS which
> supports realtime kernel. So I wonder does anyone have experience in
> this on scientific linux? Does it support realtime kernel?

NI Linux Real-Time is based off of the PREEMPT_RT patch set which you
can find on the kernel.org Wiki.

https://rt.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT_Patch

I've never compiled an EL kernel with the patch, but there is no
reason why it should not be possible.

Brandon Vincent

ATOM RSS1 RSS2