Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 7 May 2008 08:02:23 -0700 (PDT) | From | Linus Torvalds <> | Subject | Re: AIM7 40% regression with 2.6.26-rc1 |
| |
On Wed, 7 May 2008, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > Quite frankly, maybe we _need_ to have a bad BKL for those to ever get > fixed. As it was, people worked on trying to make the BKL behave better, > and it was a failure. Rather than spend the effort on trying to make it > work better (at a horrible cost), why not just say "Hell no - if you have > issues with it, you need to work with people to get rid of the BKL > rather than cluge around it".
Put another way: if we had introduced the BKL-as-semaphore with a known 40% performance drop in AIM7, I would simply never ever have accepted the patch in the first place, regardless of _any_ excuses.
Performance is a feature too.
Now, just because the code is already merged should not be an excuse for it then being shown to be bad. It's not a valid excuse to say "but we already merged it, so we can't unmerge it". We sure as hell _can_ unmerge it.
Linus
| |