[lkml]   [2002]   [Feb]   [24]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [RFC] [PATCH] C exceptions in kernel
    Jes Sorensen writes:
    > Keith Owens <> writes:
    > > So you have arch dependent code which has to be done for all
    > > architectures before any driver can use it and the code has to be kept
    > > up to date by each arch maintainer. Tell me again why the existing
    > > mechanisms are not working and why we need exceptions? IOW, what
    > > existing problem justifies all the extra arch work and maintenance?
    > Sorry, can't tell you why as I agree wholeheartedly with you. My
    > point was that even if it was possible to implement exceptions 'for
    > free' on all architectures, then it's still not what we want in the
    > kernel. It's just too gross and makes people think about the code
    > the wrong way.

    This seems worthy of a new FAQ entry:
    And while I was at it, I moved a bunch of these religious questions
    into their own section. Section 1 is a bit of a hodge-podge.


    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:24    [W:0.019 / U:13.336 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site