Re: FEATURE REQUEST: Specific Processor Optimizations on x86 Architecture

From: Joseph D. Wagner
Date: Wed Oct 22 2003 - 21:41:40 EST


First off, thanks Dave for having a far more polite and meaningful response
to potty-mouth Tim Hockin.

>> So what?

> You can't use FP code in the kernel.

What can't be done today, might be done tommorrow.

I've long complained -- in this forum and in others -- that there's a lack
of vision, or at least a lack of documented and published vision, when it
comes to the future of kernel development. If you're wondering why I don't
do it myself, it's because I don't know enough of where the project is
headed, and I can't find out because it's not documented. Catch-22.
However, this is entirely a separate discussion.

I am thinking of future development. I know this point is kind of moot
because 2.6 already adopts the change, but that hasn't stopped about a
dozen backports of other features to previous versions of the kernel.

> You're reading into this far too much.

Perhaps I'm reading too much into this from your personal message, and if I
have overreacted to your personal message I apologize. However, this isn't
the first time I've tried to help out, and deal with, the open source
community. The community isn't very welcoming to newcomers which has made
me a bit short tempered when dealing with them.

> Your proposed change is in part already vetoed (for sound reasons)
> for 2.4, and is already included in the development branch
> (where such a far-reaching change should be tested). The other part
> of your proposal is completely bogus as far as the kernel is concerned.

I respectivly disagree with those reasons. -march is gcc flag. If it
creates any instability (doubtful), it's really a gcc problem. Throwing it
in will light a fire under their @$$ to get their act together.

>> If you don't make the change, I will consider it conclusive proof
>> that the whole free-as-in-freedom is really just free-as-in-beer.

> No amount of 'threats' are going to change this.

That's not a threat, Dave. That's a statement of fact. If this change
isn't put in, my opinion will be of x. It's a fact that my opinion will be
of this nature. A threat would be if I took some sort of action that would
be damning to the linux kernel project or open source as a whole, and my
opinion -- for what it's worth -- doesn't carry enough weight to be damning
to either.

Joseph D. Wagner
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/