lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2002]   [Feb]   [24]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [RFC] [PATCH] C exceptions in kernel
    Jes Sorensen writes:
    > Keith Owens <kaos@ocs.com.au> 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: http://www.tux.org/lkml/#s15-5
    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.

    Regards,

    Richard....
    Permanent: rgooch@atnf.csiro.au
    Current: rgooch@ras.ucalgary.ca
    -
    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/

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:24    [W:0.023 / U:29.772 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site