On Mon, 13 Jun 2005 17:48:56 PDT, Daniel Walker said: > On Fri, 2005-05-27 at 11:14 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > to make sure the wide context has not been lost: no way is IRQ threading > > ever going to be the main or even the preferred mode of operation. > > That's depressing .. You not ever submitting IRQ threading upstream ? My reading was "in the same sense that NUMA and cpusets aren't the main or preferred mode of operation". But that's just my reading of it - Ingo may have meant something else...
Attachment:
pgpr4kf336CGo.pgp
Description: PGP signature
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: RT patch acceptance
- From: Daniel Walker <[email protected]>
- Re: RT patch acceptance
- References:
- Re: RT patch acceptance
- From: Andrew Morton <[email protected]>
- Re: RT patch acceptance
- From: Sven Dietrich <[email protected]>
- Re: RT patch acceptance
- From: Andrew Morton <[email protected]>
- Re: RT patch acceptance
- From: Ingo Molnar <[email protected]>
- Re: RT patch acceptance
- From: Andi Kleen <[email protected]>
- Re: RT patch acceptance
- From: Sven-Thorsten Dietrich <[email protected]>
- Re: RT patch acceptance
- From: Andi Kleen <[email protected]>
- Re: RT patch acceptance
- From: Sven-Thorsten Dietrich <[email protected]>
- Re: RT patch acceptance
- From: Andi Kleen <[email protected]>
- Re: RT patch acceptance
- From: Thomas Gleixner <[email protected]>
- Re: RT patch acceptance
- From: Ingo Molnar <[email protected]>
- Re: RT patch acceptance
- From: Daniel Walker <[email protected]>
- Re: RT patch acceptance
- Prev by Date: Re: Attempted summary of "RT patch acceptance" thread
- Next by Date: Re: [RFC] exit_thread() speedups in x86 process.c
- Previous by thread: Re: RT patch acceptance
- Next by thread: Re: RT patch acceptance
- Index(es):
 |