Message-ID: <429349A0.90305@yahoo.com.au>
Date: Wed, 25 May 2005 01:34:56 +1000
From: Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7.6) Gecko/20050324 Debian/1.7.6-1
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@infradead.org>
CC: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
       Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>, Arjan van de Ven <arjanv@infradead.org>,
       linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [patch] Voluntary Kernel Preemption, 2.6.12-rc4-mm2
References: <20050524121541.GA17049@elte.hu>	 <20050524132105.GA29477@elte.hu> <20050524145636.GA15943@infradead.org>	 <20050524150950.GA10736@elte.hu>  <4293466B.5070200@yahoo.com.au> <1116948792.6280.26.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org>
In-Reply-To: <1116948792.6280.26.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1021
Lines: 24

Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> On Wed, 2005-05-25 at 01:21 +1000, Nick Piggin wrote:
> 
>>IIRC, the reason (when you wrote the code) was that you didn't
>>want to enable preempt either because of binary compatibility, or
>>because of bugs? Well I think the bug issue is no more since your
>>debug patches went in, and the compatibility reason may be a fine
>>one for a distro kernel, but not a kernel.org one.
> 
> 
> I can't imagine binary compatibility having been a reason. At least for
> the RH distros it really isn't kernel wise. At All.
> PREEMPT was (and is?) a stability risk and so you'll see RHEL4 not
> having it enabled. But it has nothing to do with in-kernel binary
> compatibility; that just doesn't exist, kernel.org or distro alike.
> 

Yeah that was the reason.

-
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/