![]() | ||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
On Wed, 7 May 2008, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > Quite frankly, maybe we _need_ to have a bad BKL for those to ever get > fixed. As it was, people worked on trying to make the BKL behave better, > and it was a failure. Rather than spend the effort on trying to make it > work better (at a horrible cost), why not just say "Hell no - if you have > issues with it, you need to work with people to get rid of the BKL > rather than cluge around it". Put another way: if we had introduced the BKL-as-semaphore with a known 40% performance drop in AIM7, I would simply never ever have accepted the patch in the first place, regardless of _any_ excuses. Performance is a feature too. Now, just because the code is already merged should not be an excuse for it then being shown to be bad. It's not a valid excuse to say "but we already merged it, so we can't unmerge it". We sure as hell _can_ unmerge it. Linus | |||||||||
| Last update: 2008-05-07 15:05 [W:0.623 / U:0.090 seconds] ©2003-2008 Jasper Spaans | ||||||||||