#I was wondering whether such draconian steep is necessary/justified in
#{Linux 2.1.105}:net/core/profile.c
#__initfunc(int net_profile_init(void)){
#[...]
# printk("Evaluating net profiler cost ...");
#[...]
# if (!(boot_cpu_data.x86_capability & 16)) {
# panic("Sorry, you CPU does not support tsc. I am dying...\n");
# return -1;
#As I think it could just disable profiling (at worst case) instead
#of using panic().
#The box would panic on me, when trying to boot 2.1.105. I'm not sure if
#this above is justifed. Was the Cyrix PR-200MMX the one with broken TSC?
#Beside that I don't think I did enabled Halt-On-Suspend explictly.
#Finally, a while ago there was talk about fixing the TSC stuff, there
#was some patches floating around. .. but are there any plans to integrate
#it into kernel?
I thought we already fucking resolved this.
First off, I'm CC:ing to Linus and Alan because I want them to know
EXACTLY how *I* feel about this..
I'm getting the axe. And I'm coming for you.
I really don't care too much about who actually CODED this, more about who
let it IN.
Such a draconian and outright ASSININE (I can't find better words for it)
measure is OBSCENE. First off, there is absolutely NO reason to tell
someone that they can't use the net profiler because we don't feel like
trying to work around a TSC that is handled differently. And SECONDLY,
there is absolutely NO reason whatsoever that a DIFFERENT METHOD could be
used to evaluate cost! A slight loss of accuracy is DEFINITELY preferrable
to LOSING THAT FEATURE!
But apparently, NOBODY thought to stop for a few moments, and consider
this. Instead, let's take the quick way out, and screw over quite a few
users in the process.
Now, those of you who are going to flame me screaming 'why don't you fix
it,' I've got a response already prepared;
I'm VERY busy right now. I have several CONTRACT jobs I am working on, I'm
busy with OTHER kernel things right now, I'm trying like mad to find a new
job (those of you looking for jacks of all trades, masters of Linux and
Networking, HIRE ME!), dealing with bronchitis *AND* asthma *AND*
allergies that trigger the asthma, and trying to find a way to make ends
meet this month.
So..
If I can find about 5 minutes tonight, I'll release a quick patch to rip
that trash code (there honestly is absolutely NO better term to describe
it) OUT, for those of you using Cyrixes.
Also, anybody who wants to claim I'm biased, I've got a Dual-P133 and a
K6-233 I'd like to show you.
And FINALLY, two things. If you want to flame me, do it in private. Other
people on the list do NOT appreciate flames (no, this is NOT a flame. This
is my opinion. I'm not trying to troll. Alan and Linus have done EXCELLENT
work to this day.) all over the place. And if you want to bitch at Alan
and Linus, DON'T. I'm sure that they don't appreciate getting screamed at.
I'll probably be lucky if they both don't filter all my emails out now.
But I feel this had to be said, so I said it. So shoot me.
These are my opinions. Not yours. If you want to quote me, do it
ACCURATELY. I *WILL* take the time to scan over list responses for
misquotes, and I will gleefully point them out to everyone.
Beyond that, I'm done with this matter. I'll get a patch out ASAP. If not
sooner. Or do it the easy way; replace the broken file with one from
2.1.104 or so. Quick, dirty, but effective, no?
This is me, done with this topic. G'night.
-Phil R. Jaenke (kernel@nls.net / prj@nls.net)
TheGuyInCharge(tm), Ketyra Designs - We get paid to break stuff :)
Linux pkrea.ketyra.INT 2.0.33 #15 Sat Apr 18 00:40:21 EDT 1998 i586
Linux eiterra.nls.net 2.1.98 #15 Fri May 1 18:21:00 EDT 1998 i586
- Linus says for 'brave people only.' I say 'keep a backup.' - :)
! I reserve the right to bill spammers for my time and disk space !
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu