Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S264276AbUFPQ6A (ORCPT ); Wed, 16 Jun 2004 12:58:00 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S264251AbUFPQyU (ORCPT ); Wed, 16 Jun 2004 12:54:20 -0400 Received: from [213.146.154.40] ([213.146.154.40]:37532 "EHLO pentafluge.infradead.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S264192AbUFPQxG (ORCPT ); Wed, 16 Jun 2004 12:53:06 -0400 Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2004 17:53:00 +0100 From: Christoph Hellwig To: Lori Gilbertson Cc: Dimitri Sivanich , Christoph Hellwig , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, Andrew Morton , lm@bitmover.com Subject: Re: [PATCH]: Option to run cache reap in thread mode Message-ID: <20040616165300.GA15411@infradead.org> Mail-Followup-To: Christoph Hellwig , Lori Gilbertson , Dimitri Sivanich , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, Andrew Morton , lm@bitmover.com References: <20040616142413.GA5588@sgi.com> <200406161646.i5GGkO5e194114@theriver.americas.sgi.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200406161646.i5GGkO5e194114@theriver.americas.sgi.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i X-SRS-Rewrite: SMTP reverse-path rewritten from by pentafluge.infradead.org See http://www.infradead.org/rpr.html Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1695 Lines: 37 On Wed, Jun 16, 2004 at 11:46:24AM -0500, Lori Gilbertson wrote: > hch wrote: > > > Given you're @sgi.com address you probably know what > > a freaking mess and maintaince nightmare IRIX has become because > > of that. > > Hi Chris, > > I'm very curious about this comment - wondering what you base it > on? I'm the engineering manager for IRIX real-time - we have > no open bugs against it and have many customers depending on it. > At least for the last 5 years had very low maintenance cost, > mostly adding features, fixing a couple of bugs and producing new > releases. > > Perhaps you would be so kind to let me know what led you to > your statement? Looks at the overhead of the normal IRIX sleeping locks vs linux spinlock (and the priority inversion and sleeping locks arguments are the next one I'll get from you I bet :)), talk to Jeremy how the HBA performance went down when he had to switch the drivers to the sleeping locks, look at the complexity of the irix scheduler with it's gazillions of special cases (and yes, I think the current Linux scheduler is already to complex), or the big mess with interrupt thread. I've added Larry to the Cc list because he knows the IRIX internals much better than I do (or at least did once) and has been warning of this move that adds complexity to no end for all the special cases for at least five years. He also had some nice IRIX vs Linux benchmarks when Linux on Indys was new. - 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/