lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2003]   [May]   [14]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] 2.5.68 FUTEX support should be optional

On Wed, 14 May 2003, Ulrich Drepper wrote:
>
> Current == current development. LinuxThreads is not developed anymore
> and with nptl futexes are mandatory.

Yes, I'm also not very eager to make "core functionality" a config option.
The confusion with the INPUT layer config options was mighty, and none of
it pleasant. And the *BSD's have historically had totally stupid problems
with programs like Wine etc requireing kernel recompiles just because they
made code functionality like vm86 mode or LDT support be a config option.

I don't see the point in dropping futexes except perhaps in a very
controlled embedded environment, but if that is the case, then a PC config
should just force it to "y" and not even ask the user.

We absolutely do NOT want the situation where a program will not work just
because the user forgot some config option that mostly isn't needed.

And futexes _are_ going to be needed. Any sane high-performance threading
implementation _will_ use them. No ifs, buts or maybe's.

Linus

-
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 13:35    [W:0.265 / U:0.048 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site