lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2003]   [Feb]   [23]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: Minutes from Feb 21 LSE Call
    On Sun, Feb 23, 2003 at 03:37:49PM -0800, Martin J. Bligh wrote:
    > >> For instance, don't locks simply get compiled away to nothing on
    > >> uni-processor machines?
    > >
    > > Preempt causes most of the issues of SMP with few of the benefits. There
    > > are loads for which it's ideal, but for general use it may not be the
    > > right feature, and I ran it during the time when it was just a patch, but
    > > lately I'm convinced it's for special occasions.
    >
    > Note that preemption was pushed by the embedded people Larry was advocating
    > for, not the big-machine crowd .... ironic, eh?

    Dig through the mail logs and you'll see that I was completely against the
    preemption patch. I think it is a bad idea, if you want real time, use
    rt/linux, it solves the problem right.
    --
    ---
    Larry McVoy lm at bitmover.com http://www.bitmover.com/lm
    -
    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 13:33    [W:0.021 / U:1.844 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site