Re: Linux 2.6.29

From: Alex Goebel
Date: Sat Mar 28 2009 - 12:25:31 EST


On 3/28/09, Stefan Richter <stefanr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Well, for the time being, why not base considerations for performance,
> interactivity, energy consumption, graceful restoration of application
> state etc. on the assumption that kernel crashes are suitably rare? (At
> least on systems where data loss would be of concern.)

Absolutely! That's what I thought all the time when following this
(meanwhile quite grotesque) discussion. Even for ordinary
home/office/laptop/desktop users (!=kernel developers), kernel crashes
are simply not a realistic scenario any more to optimize anything for
(which is due to the good work you guys are doing in making/keeping
the kernel stable).

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