Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 20 Feb 2006 14:30:05 +0100 | From | Pavel Machek <> | Subject | Re: Which is simpler? (Was Re: [Suspend2-devel] Re: [ 00/10] [Suspend2] Modules support.) |
| |
> Hi. > > On Monday 20 February 2006 20:02, Lee Revell wrote: > > On Mon, 2006-02-20 at 10:39 +0100, Matthias Hensler wrote: > > > > It is slightly slower, > > > > > > Sorry, but that is just unacceptable. > > > > Um... suspend2 puts extra tests into really hot paths like fork(), which > > is equally unacceptable to many people. > > It doesn't. > > Fork is only a 'really hot path' if you have a fork bomb running. The > scheduler is a really hot path (which Suspend2 patches don't touch, by the > way).
Heh, tell that to Andrew and people running configure scripts. With attitude like this, do you wonder why you can't get a patch merged?
Pavel -- Thanks, Sharp! - 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/
| |