[lkml]   [1996]   [Sep]   [29]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: modules problems
"AC" == Alan Cox <> writes:
AC> Its an inevitability of an efficient interface. In the SMP case its very
AC> very hard not to have different structures. To start with your hardware
AC> is in places quite different. We could always use the SMP build but that
AC> would punish 99.5% or so of the folks who just happen to have only one

After hacking a driver for the Jorway 73a SCSI-CAMAC controler under
Solaris 2.4, I'd agree totally. There is a tremendous amount of
overhead in assuming that the driver need be MT safe. Solaris makes
things have to happen this way for a sound reason but it makes the
driver 10X heavier and more complex than we need it for an SS10 (that
they won't let me run Linux on 8-(). I can see benefits as well for
enforcing such a scheme even in monoprocessor situations, but one can
code to those benefits without having that much complexity.

On the other hand, if a company wants to support Linux, then who am I to
complain. They should keep in mind what hardware base their code will
run on. Maby push an MT safe (heavy but works everywhere) and a non MT
safe (smaller and lighter) driver.


 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:38    [W:0.070 / U:0.404 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site