Re: new IRQ scalability changes in 2.3.48

From: Rob Landley (
Date: Wed Mar 15 2000 - 21:08:46 EST

Linus Torvalds ( wrote:

> Threaded kernels are WAAAY overvalued. I did not agree with the
> low-latency patches because I thought they were ugly for no real
> gain. I _would_ agree to the UP-case only thing, simply because it
> uses the SMP locking that already exists, and extends it in a simple
> way to the UP case ("threading" a UP box by making the scheduling
> consider one CPU as a special case of multiple CPU's).

Don't forget the debugging advantages. Suddenly the vast unwashed horde
of us using UP boxes will start beating the SMP locking logic to death
on a daily basis looking for race conditions. :)

So, would this be a 2.4 thing or is it just too dangerous this late in
the game?


To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
Please read the FAQ at

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Mar 23 2000 - 21:00:19 EST