Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id <S278976AbRJVVnD>; Mon, 22 Oct 2001 17:43:03 -0400
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org
	id <S278964AbRJVVld>; Mon, 22 Oct 2001 17:41:33 -0400
Received: from waste.org ([209.173.204.2]:23120 "EHLO waste.org")
	by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id <S278965AbRJVVk1>;
	Mon, 22 Oct 2001 17:40:27 -0400
Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2001 16:44:14 -0500 (CDT)
From: Oliver Xymoron <oxymoron@waste.org>
To: Marcelo Roberto Jimenez <mroberto@cetuc.puc-rio.br>
cc: <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: VM
In-Reply-To: <3032.139.82.28.36.1003786396.squirrel@mamona.cetuc.puc-rio.br>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.30.0110221640310.8629-100000@waste.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Mon, 22 Oct 2001, Marcelo Roberto Jimenez wrote:

> Alan Cox wrote:
> > > > Too ugly for words.
> > >
> > > Though, if it's done from the start of 2.5, it could be very possible.
> > > Is there a way to make it non-ugly?
> >
> > I would hope by then we have a definitive answer as to the best path in
> > the VM world
>
> Maybe there's no such answer. Maybe it's undecidable. In the
> mathematical (G?del) sense.

In the event that we're unable to determine which one has the best
performance in a finite amount of time, the simpler design wins.
So there will be a decision.

--
 "Love the dolphins," she advised him. "Write by W.A.S.T.E.."

-
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/