Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Sun, 13 Jan 2002 19:44:00 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sun, 13 Jan 2002 19:42:44 -0500 Received: from smtpzilla2.xs4all.nl ([194.109.127.138]:46854 "EHLO smtpzilla2.xs4all.nl") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Sun, 13 Jan 2002 19:41:48 -0500 Message-ID: <3C42293F.4962EC82@linux-m68k.org> Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 01:41:35 +0100 From: Roman Zippel X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.4.17 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: yodaiken@fsmlabs.com CC: Alan Cox , Robert Love , Kenneth Johansson , arjan@fenrus.demon.nl, Rob Landley , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [2.4.17/18pre] VM and swap - it's really unusable In-Reply-To: <3C41ED4E.4D3F2D2C@linux-m68k.org> <20020113171006.A17958@hq.fsmlabs.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi, yodaiken@fsmlabs.com wrote: > > It's a useful patch for anyone, who needs good latencies now, but it's > > still a quick&dirty solution. Preempt offers a clean solution for a > > certain part of the problem, as it's possible to cleanly localize the > > needed changes for preemption (at least for UP). That means the ll patch > > becomes smaller and future work on ll becomes simpler, since a certain > > That is exactly what Andrew Morton disputes. So why do you think he is > wrong? Please explain, what do you mean? bye, Roman - 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/