lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2000]   [Nov]   [4]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [PATCH] Re: Negative scalability by removal of


    On Sat, 4 Nov 2000, Alan Cox wrote:
    >
    > > Even 2.2.x can be fixed to do the wake-one for accept(), if required.
    >
    > Do we really want to retrofit wake_one to 2.2. I know Im not terribly keen to
    > try and backport all the mechanism. I think for 2.2 using the semaphore is a
    > good approach. Its a hack to fix an old OS kernel. For 2.4 its not needed

    We don't need to backport of the full exclusive wait queues: we could do
    the equivalent of the semaphore inside the kernel around just accept(). It
    wouldn't be a generic thing, but it would fix the specific case of
    accept().

    Otherwise we're going to have old binaries of apache lying around forever
    that do the wrong thing..

    Linus

    -
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
    Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 12:45    [W:0.022 / U:91.152 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site