Hi,
On Mon, 20 Jun 2005, Ulrich Windl wrote:
> Basically, either the new clock system has to be optional (a maintenance nightmare
> most likely), or you'll have to require a specific amount of performance for the
> latest software. If you cannot fulfill the requirements, you'll have to stick with
> an older release of the software.
>
> Maybe let's try to make it as good (correct and efficient (and understandable) as
> good as we can.
If nobody can explain to me the perfomance impact of patch, maybe the
patch isn't so understandable in first place?
I could also have asked how that code scales up, e.g. how much more work
has to be done for a thousand Linux images. (AFAICR this question also
came up in the context of tickless systems).
This patch is really damned hard to read as it changes too many things at
once. Maybe it does some necessary cleanups, but they are hard see, as
they pretty much get lost in all the functional changes.
I'm pretty close to suggest to reject this patch until it clearly
separates new functionality from cleanups. If the current system is broken
fix it first, if the current system is a mess clean it up first, but
don't mix these two steps, unless you want to introduce more broken mess.
bye, Roman
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
