Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 21:01:34 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 21:00:04 -0500 Received: from e31.co.us.ibm.com ([32.97.110.129]:34693 "EHLO e31.co.us.ibm.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 20:59:30 -0500 Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2001 17:59:04 -0800 From: "Martin J. Bligh" Reply-To: "Martin J. Bligh" To: Larry McVoy , Stephan von Krawczynski cc: Horst von Brand , lkml Subject: Re: Linux/Pro [was Re: Coding style - a non-issue] Message-ID: <2379997133.1007402344@mbligh.des.sequent.com> In-Reply-To: <20011202155440.F2622@work.bitmover.com> X-Mailer: Mulberry/2.0.8 (Win32) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org >> Please Larry, have a look at the environment: nobody here owns a box >> with 128 CPUs. Most of the people here take care of things they either >> - own themselves >> - have their hands own at work >> - get paid for >> >> You will not find _any_ match with 128 CPUs here. > > Nor will you find any match with 4 or 8 CPU systems, except in very rare > cases. Yet changes go into the system for 8 way and 16 way performance. > That's a mistake. > > I'd be ecstatic if the hackers limited themselves to what was commonly > available, that is essentially what I'm arguing for. We need a *little* bit of foresight. If 4 ways are common now, and 8 ways and 16 ways are available, then in a year or two 8 ways (at least) will be commonplace. On the other hand 128 cpu machines are a way off, and I'd agree we shouldn't spend too much time on them right now. Martin. - 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/