![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
On Wed, 3 Sep 2003 18:52:49 -0700 Larry McVoy <lm@bitmover.com> wrote: > On Thu, Sep 04, 2003 at 03:50:31AM +0200, Daniel Phillips wrote: > > There are other arguments, such as how complex locking is, and how it will > > never work correctly, but those are noise: it's pretty much done now, the > > complexity is still manageable, and Linux has never been more stable. > > yeah, right. I'm not sure what you are smoking but I'll avoid your dealer. I hate to enter these threads but... The amount of locking bugs found in the core networking, ipv4, and ipv6 for a year or two in 2.4.x has been nearly nil. If you're going to try and argue against supporting huge SMP to me, don't make locking complexity one of the arguments. :-) - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ | ||||||||||||
| Last update: 2005-03-22 13:48 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||||