[lkml]   [2000]   [Jul]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: a joint letter on low latency and Linux
    Albert D. Cahalan wrote:
    > >> No, you can use a pure PentiumIII-SMP kernel as long as it provides
    > >> the code-modification services for generic modules. Compiled-in
    > >> drivers simply don't call (or trap to) the self-modification engine.
    > >
    > > What if i want a pure PIII-UP kernel? How are the different data
    > > structures handled?
    > You get it, but you may need to give up generic module support.
    > This isn't any worse than what we have today.

    But it _is_ worse, unless you expect the generic module support
    not to be widely adopted, in which case there is no point in
    having it...
    Having a generic driver api and being able to use one binary driver
    (with or w/o src) with all kernel configuration would certainly
    be a good thing, but pushing the support cost into the core
    kernel isn't. Not when you can build "generic" modules on top
    of another layer which hides all the differences from the driver.
    Yes, the runtime cost is much higher, but it is localized -- except
    for the generic modules nothing else is affected.
    Hmm, you could also use the previously mentioned linking tricks
    to significantly reduce the overhead added by the extra layer.
    (eg by having a smarter "insmod" loader)
    Now the kernel and all "native" drivers aren't slowed down, and
    the binary drivers are reasonably efficient.

    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 13:57    [W:0.019 / U:7.992 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site