Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 06 Oct 2004 12:02:48 +1000 | From | Nick Piggin <> | Subject | Re: Preempt? (was Re: Cannot enable DMA on SATA drive (SCSI-libsata, VIA SATA)) |
| |
Jeff Garzik wrote: > On Tue, Oct 05, 2004 at 09:52:55PM -0400, Robert Love wrote: > >>On Tue, 2004-10-05 at 21:40 -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote: >> >> >>>And with preempt you're still hiding stuff that needs fixing. And when >>>it gets fixed, you don't need preempt. >>> >>>Therefore, preempt is just a hack that hides stuff that wants fixing anyway.
What is it hiding exactly?
>> >>This actually sounds like the argument for preempt, and against > > > As opposed to fixing drivers??? Please fix the drivers and code first. >
I thought you just said preempt should be turned off because it breaks things (ie. as opposed to fixing the things that it breaks).
But anyway, yeah obviously fixing drivers always == good. I don't think anybody advocated otherwise. - 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/
| |