On September 7, 2001 06:45 am, Robert Love wrote:
> On Fri, 2001-09-07 at 00:36, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> > Given the minimal nature of the patch I would suggest that it become part
> > of 2.4.10 or 11
>
> Are you kidding? We will be lucky to see this in during 2.5.
> Its a pretty big change. It makes the Linux kernel preemptible.
CONFIG_PREEMPT
> This is a fairly big move, one I don't think any of the major Unices have
> done.
The other Unices are at least evenly split, or mostly preemptible.
Typically, a more complex strategy is used where spinlocks can sleep
after a few spins. This patch is very conservative in that regard,
it basically just uses the structure we already have, SMP spinlocks.
> The only reason the patch is not _huge_ is because the Linux
> kernel is already setup for concurrency of this nature -- it does SMP.
>
> I suggest you read
> http://www.linuxdevices.com/articles/AT4185744181.html
> http://www.linuxdevices.com/articles/AT5152980814.html
> http://kpreempt.sourceforge.net
>
> and my previous threads on this issue, for more informaiton.
Hmm, how did you read those and come to such a different conclusion?
-- Daniel - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Sep 07 2001 - 21:00:38 EST