Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S266758AbUJFCIF (ORCPT ); Tue, 5 Oct 2004 22:08:05 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S266786AbUJFCIF (ORCPT ); Tue, 5 Oct 2004 22:08:05 -0400 Received: from havoc.gtf.org ([69.28.190.101]:45015 "EHLO havoc.gtf.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S266758AbUJFCHx (ORCPT ); Tue, 5 Oct 2004 22:07:53 -0400 Date: Tue, 5 Oct 2004 22:07:34 -0400 From: Jeff Garzik To: Nick Piggin Cc: Robert Love , Roland Dreier , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Preempt? (was Re: Cannot enable DMA on SATA drive (SCSI-libsata, VIA SATA)) Message-ID: <20041006020734.GA29383@havoc.gtf.org> References: <4136E4660006E2F7@mail-7.tiscali.it> <41634236.1020602@pobox.com> <52is9or78f.fsf_-_@topspin.com> <4163465F.6070309@pobox.com> <41634A34.20500@yahoo.com.au> <41634CF3.5040807@pobox.com> <1097027575.5062.100.camel@localhost> <20041006015515.GA28536@havoc.gtf.org> <41635248.5090903@yahoo.com.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <41635248.5090903@yahoo.com.au> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1571 Lines: 48 On Wed, Oct 06, 2004 at 12:02:48PM +1000, Nick Piggin wrote: > Jeff Garzik wrote: > >On Tue, Oct 05, 2004 at 09:52:55PM -0400, Robert Love wrote: > > > >>On Tue, 2004-10-05 at 21:40 -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote: > >> > >> > >>>And with preempt you're still hiding stuff that needs fixing. And when > >>>it gets fixed, you don't need preempt. > >>> > >>>Therefore, preempt is just a hack that hides stuff that wants fixing > >>>anyway. > > What is it hiding exactly? Bugs and high latency code paths that should instead be fixed. > >>This actually sounds like the argument for preempt, and against > > > > > >As opposed to fixing drivers??? Please fix the drivers and code first. > > > > I thought you just said preempt should be turned off because it > breaks things (ie. as opposed to fixing the things that it breaks). > > But anyway, yeah obviously fixing drivers always == good. I don't > think anybody advocated otherwise. By _definition_, when you turn on preempt, you hide the stuff I just described above. Hiding that stuff means that users and developers won't see code paths that need fixing. If users and developers aren't aware of code paths that need fixing, they don't get fixed. Therefore, by advocating preempt, you are advocating a solution _other than_ actually making the necessary fixes. Jeff - 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/