From owner-freebsd-hackers  Sun Jan 23 18:14:33 2000
Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
Received: from kot.ne.mediaone.net (kot.ne.mediaone.net [24.218.15.190])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 951101576C; Sun, 23 Jan 2000 18:14:21 -0800 (PST)
	(envelope-from mi@kot.ne.mediaone.net)
Received: from rtfm.newton (mi@rtfm.newton [10.10.0.1])
	by kot.ne.mediaone.net (8.9.3/8.9.1) with ESMTP id VAA06601;
	Sun, 23 Jan 2000 21:14:09 -0500 (EST)
From: Mikhail Teterin <mi@kot.ne.mediaone.net>
X-Relay-IP: 10.10.0.1
Received: (from mi@localhost)
	by rtfm.newton (8.9.3/8.9.3) id VAA45195;
	Sun, 23 Jan 2000 21:14:09 -0500 (EST)
	(envelope-from mi@kot.ne.mediaone.net)
Message-Id: <200001240214.VAA45195@rtfm.newton>
Subject: Re: kern/13644
In-Reply-To: <20000123200807.A19917@dan.emsphone.com> from Dan Nelson at "Jan
 23, 2000 08:08:07 pm"
To: Dan Nelson <dnelson@emsphone.com>
Date: Sun, 23 Jan 2000 21:14:09 -0500 (EST)
Cc: Mikhail Teterin <mi@kot.ne.mediaone.net>,
	Jason Evans <jasone@canonware.com>,
	David Schwartz <davids@webmaster.com>, bde@FreeBSD.ORG,
	hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
X-Face: %UW#n0|w>ydeGt/b@1-.UFP=K^~-:0f#O:D7w<gv/&E-lL7twZCT8B~/PA4|\t$ti+22K">
	 hJ5G_<5143Bb3kOIs9XpX+"V+~$adGP:J|SLieM31VIhqXeLBli"<kcG^EOVih
	 y+z3/UR{6SCQ
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL60 (25)]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG

Dan Nelson once stated:

=In the last episode (Jan 23), Mikhail Teterin said:
=> =FreeBSD  is clearly  not capable  of hard  real-time. If  I remember
=> =correctly, neither are  any of the operating systems  from which you
=> =quoted man pages. That makes *all* of those man pages inaccurate.
=> 
=> In other  words,   we  found   a  flaw  in   the  most   (all?)  Unix
=> Inimplementations? cluding FreeBSD. Alright.
=
=If you want to call it a flaw, then yes. The kernel always has priority
=over user processes.

I understand.  And this will also  happen in case of  a simple printf().
What I see, however, with select()  is that it _consistently_ takes 9-10
msecs longer  then specified  to return. On  an idle  machine... Someone
mentioned, that the  number of ticks is, actually,  rounded up. Perhaps,
it should be rounded down?

	-mi


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message