[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:0.020 / U:21.624 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site