William Allen Simpson wrote, On 12/11/2009 06:01 PM:Good point. Since I've only met him a couple of times, roughly aA month ago, I'd taken the final line "Ho humm.." of Linus'
response to mean he wasn't interested. But at the local
discussion yesterday, I'm told that's just a typical Linusism.
Why would he write 6 paragraphs if he wasn't interested?
As I mentioned, I'm not the person to do either of the former -- I'mThe thread diverged into discussion of another document entirely.
I'm not the person to update this document with any of the other
information about global locks and tasklists and such. But surely
somebody else could handle that in another patch.
Anybody have answers/updates to Linus's concerns about "pretty old
and bogus language"? Would folks be interested in the update?
Does anybody know which list(s) would be better for discussion?
I guess, you could literally start with removing this "global
interrupt lock", adding "the example of a _good_ case of rwlocks",
plus Stephen's "it is not just networking" fix in v3.