RE: [PATCH] 2.5.68 FUTEX support should be optional

From: Christopher Hoover (ch@murgatroid.com)
Date: Wed May 14 2003 - 19:58:11 EST


> I don't see the point in dropping futexes except
> perhaps in a very controlled embedded environment,
> but if that is the case, then a PC config
> should just force it to "y" and not even ask the user.

We could do this (et al) under CONFIG_TINY, if you would prefer.

> We absolutely do NOT want the situation where
> a program will not work just because the user forgot
> some config option that mostly isn't needed.

This a specious argument. There are many ways one can configure a
kernel that will make it fail to boot or run user space properly.
There's no getting around knowing what it is your configuring in and
out.

Note that I set the default to Y. I also agree that I could have been
more verbose in the help string.

> And futexes _are_ going to be needed. Any sane high-performance
threading
> implementation _will_ use them. No ifs, buts or maybe's.

All big machines, sure. All small machines, it depends. All the (user)
world is not glibc.

-ch

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu May 15 2003 - 22:00:54 EST