[lkml]   [1999]   [Dec]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: Binary drivers
  "Kendall Bennett" <> writes:

> > And, yes, there will be obvious performance hits in some cases,
> > but thats exactly WHY Linus and Alan don't support binary drivers
> > now. If they do that, the kernel API's get frozen and they lose the
> > ability to innovate.
> Wrong. You will only get a performance hit *if* there has been a
> change to the internal kernel API's that necessitate a compatibility
> layer to be implemented so the old drivers can still be used. This
> doesn't mean that a performance hit is necessary for all drivers.

I don't think so. Implementing a binary compatible API usually requires a
level of indirection that makes optimizations like inlining impossible.

> This is what developed OS'es in the real world is all about. Every
> commercial OS on the planet does things this way because that is the
> only way to guarantee reliability down the track. Alan can complain
> about the stability of Windows 9x being attributed to binary drivers,
> but the same argument does not hold true for Windows NT, OS/2,
> Solaris, Netware, QNX, BeOS, MacOS or any other commercial OS. Fact
> is they all use binary device drivers, and many of them are a lot
> more stable than Linux is.

.... and a _lot_ slower on the same hardware.

tim writer <> starnix inc.
tollfree: 1-87-pro-linux brampton, ontario, canada professional linux services & products

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:55    [W:0.100 / U:3.404 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site