On Fri, Oct 21, 2005 at 02:12:49PM -0400, Luben Tuikov wrote:
> > That beeing said I tried this approach. It looks pretty cool when you
> > think about it, but the block layer is quite a bit too heavyweight for
> > queueing up a few SMP requests, and we need to carry too much useless
> > code around for it.
>
> That's the last reason not to implement SMP as a block device.
> But this is good that you tried it and it "flopped". This way
> people will stop repeating "SMP... block device".
Block layer != Block device.
Nobody wants to implement SMP as a block device.
The question is whether the SMP interface should be implemented as part
of the block layer.
-
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]
