I am looking for some contribution for real time linux which majorly involves RT_PRREMPT patch .
The wiki page of RT are pretty old i,e it says its been updated last at 2008
Also there are no wish list or bug list specific to RT _Preempt
Even bug zilla also doesn't have much on rt preempt?
Any resource pointing towards bugs ,features that are to be added to RT_preempt would be a lot of help.
Yes, thankfully, it does seem to be alive and well.
I can understand your tension: on 21 Oct 2014, an LWN article - The future of the realtime patch set - quoted Thomas Gleixner at less-than-highly-optimistic regarding the future of the PREEMPT_RT project.
The good news: recently, as of 05 Oct 2015, LF seems to have a working group in place for RT Linux.
Additional info here:
The Linux Foundation Announces Project to Advance Real-Time Linux
By Linux_Foundation - October 5, 2015 – 8:14am
and here:
Real-Time Linux on the go, OSADL
(quoting from the article)
“… OSADL is looking forward to a fruitful collaboration in the Linux Foundation RTL Working Group. We very much hope that a day will come in the foreseeable future when Linux mainline will immediately contain - without any further patching - the PREEMPT_RT configuration option. And we can only appeal to the other members of the RTL Working Group to not let Linux users wait too long. OSADL certainly will continue to go for it.”
Related
According to a comment in one of my previous Questions Linux System Calls. Linux wasn't implemented on 8086/88 Intel CPUs. So what was the first Intel CPU to support Linux and implement its system calls?
From the horse's mouth itself (with no insult intended to Linus):
Hello everybody out there using minix -
I'm doing a (free) operating system (just a hobby, won't be big and professional like gnu) for 386(486) AT clones.
This has been brewing since april, and is starting to get ready. I'd like any feedback on things people like/dislike in minix, as my OS resembles it somewhat (same physical layout of the file-system (due to practical reasons) among other things).
I've currently ported bash(1.08) and gcc(1.40), and things seem to work. This implies that I'll get something practical within a few months, and I'd like to know what features most people would want. Any suggestions are welcome, but I won't promise I'll implement them :-)
Linus (torvalds#kruuna.helsinki.fi)
PS. Yes – it's free of any minix code, and it has a multi-threaded fs. It is NOT portable (uses 386 task switching etc), and it probably never will support anything other than AT-harddisks, as that's all I have :-(.
This is from the August '91 Usenet posting where Linus first announced his baby.
Hence 386 was the first CPU it was implemented on.
Only those of us who suffered having to lock memory sections at their location in Windows real mode, to prevent the memory manager emulator from moving them around without telling you, will appreciate what a good move Linus made in not trying to shoehorn Linux on to earlier CPUs.
I particularly love the:
just a hobby, won't be big and professional like gnu
comment. If only Linus had realised how big this beast would become.
Do you know if new editions of ULK or R.Love's books are going to be re-released? Or maybe another book is in writings?
Latest books are based on 2.6.18 kernels, so I'm looking if anything newer is coming.
The Third edition of Robert Love's Linux Kernel Development came out less than two years ago and is based on 2.6.34. I don't think there have been any substantial changes to the kernel since.
http://blog.rlove.org/2010/07/linux-kernel-development-third-edition.html
There are two good and mostly still accurate books on the Linux kernel. I'm not aware of anyone writing a new book just now.
If you just care about higher structures, how the scheduler works and things like that, use the Robert Love 3rd Edition.
If you want to know about all the various driver subsystems, choose the Venkateswaran book.
Note that the book is now exactly 3 years old and is starting to show its age.
All other kernel books (including Jonathan Corbet's, Bovet/Cesati and others) are no longer worth reading: too much details have changed.
Especially anything pre 2.6.24 should be avoided because the updated timer framework that got finalized at that revision had quite a big ripple effect.
2.6 was upgraded on 3.0 just because there was 20th anniversary of kernel. 3.0 does not have many breathtaking ideas, and most books relevant for 2.6.x are also relevant for 3.0.x
https://lwn.net/Articles/452531/
I'm looking to learn AutoCAD. I have found several videos online that relate to 2006 AutoCAD - but is there a difference to any of of the versions. I have seen job postings asking to know AutoCAD 2008 -- what happens if I only know 2011 or even 2010. Can I work with 2008? Is there a difference to any of this versions or years?
AutoCAD is a lot like Windows... They have major releases and minor releases, so the change from 2006-2007 was a significant change. They roll out a major release every couple years or so. Still, it just depends on what you're doing. If you've got to draw a line, it's drawing a line, and that doesn't change a lot from one release to another. Some companies use the "features" of the software, but lots of them don't. My advice: get an account with Autodesk University here and click through the online classes. Look for some basic AutoCAD classes. It will really help you learn about the software and the changes made from one release to another. Also: If you get an interview for a CAD job, they will probably give you a test... usually it's just drawing something in CAD from a piece of paper. I had one of these where I had to use a version of AutoCAD called Architectural Desktop. I had never even seen Architectural Desktop before, so I asked the person interviewing me, "Where do I start?" He showed my how to start, and I actually got the job. That was 7 years ago and I still work for that company today. Use the free tutorials to acquaint yourself with the software, but don't be intimidated by it. If you get as far as testing in an interview, do your best, and don't be afraid to ask questions.
If I recall correctly 2006 was still a version without the ribbon interface. In any case, the most significant change in user interface in the recent years was exactly that - caused quite a bit of stir when it was first introduced, and many drafters still switch to "old" toolbar.
As far as changes go, yes, there are quite a few. But as Asheville said, they more relate to some advanced features of the software, which at this time you will probably not be using. My advice would be to start with some of the newer versions ("the ribbon" ones) and adjust yourself to it. After you've grasped the fundamentals, and found your way around, and wish to expand your knowledge in a more systematic way (although we all know this almost never works :) I would go to one of the either; "Autocad xxxx Bible", or "Mastering Autocad xxxx" books where xxxx signifies the version. They are quite heavy (figuratively and literally) and you can skim through as you progress. Most of the things in there you probably won't need, unless you find yourself working in a large draft office which has it's own way of organizing data, drawing styles, ...
Autocad forums are also a good place to ask questions (search first !) ... the community there is quite helpful.
I would need your help. I've come across an interesting book - Programming the Cell Processor: For Games, Graphics, and Computation - it contains mostly C and some Assembly for Cell. The technology is interesting indeed, but there are some doubts on my side.
The book is from 2008 and some things has changed:
There is no Linux support on current firmware version.
Last version on IBM's website is from 2008 Red Hat Enterprise 5.2 and Fedora 9 - has anyone an experience running this IBM SDK on Fedora 13 or at least any version higher than stated Fedora 9, and is Linux available of sufficient testing?
Would it be useful for example for creation of distributable PSN game, and if anyone knows anything about price to actualy get a product there (as I've heard that it waaaaay more expensive than for example X-box indie games)
So do you think that it is worth it or not? Be it just for education purposes or something "more" serious?
Any thoughts are welcomed, thank you!
Cell was dumped by IBM for general purpose computers. It will live for the next 5 years in the Playstation and i'm pretty sure that the next generation Playstation - whenever it will be ready - will also use Cell again because establishing something new in CPU land is so unaffordable today.
But as a technolgy it is indeed no longer interested. Learning CUDA might be a better choice.
Given that you don't have access to a Cell machine, I'd advise that it's probably not worth it. I absolutely love the Cell architecture - I think it was a fantastic step in the right direction. Unfortunately, having done some Cell development in the past, I was really disappointed with the tool chain, the simulator and the seemingly hostile attitude taken towards developers recently.
So given that you're not going to be able to use a real Cell machine in order to get the speed gains you would get from writing programs within that idiom, you'd probably be much better off looking into general distributed programming techniques (using MPI or something similar). These skills are going to be readily transferrable to the Cell or its derivatives, or any similar architectures that might arise in the future.
As far as I'm concerned, and as much as it pains me, I think the Cell is basically a developmental dead end unless you have access to a commercial development license, you'll be extremely frustrated in your ability to actually get anything out of the architecture.
I'm getting really upset with the whole direction that "Emborcadero" is taking and I'm really going to invest in FPC/Lazarus.
Went to the Lazarus Documentation page and found the following blogs:
Lazarus Development - Up to date
Adventures of a Newbie - FPC Wiki page
On the road with Lazarus/Free Pascal - Up to date
Porting to Lazarus - Last post December 2009
Living Lazarus - Last post September 2009
Parallel Pascal Worlds - Up to date
Can someone suggest more resources in terms of Blogs or Twitter accounts to follow?
I just ran into
FPC and Delphi: toward a "fratricidal war"?
But I don't like the tone. While it is true that the absence of colaboration between FPC and Delphi leads to incompatibilities in the newest features, I think he makes a too big deal out of it.
Moreover, most people that chose for FPC/Lazarus do so because they are needing some real features of FPC/Lazarus that Delphi doesn't provide or plans to provide. It is rarely a one dimensional "Lazarus is free" choice.
like e.g. native interfacing with OS X, while Embarcadero only prepares a QT port),
ARM/PowerPC/Sparc support etc.
Well, there are some blogposts by user leledumbo from the lazarus forum