Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Sat, 22 Jun 2002 08:41:16 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sat, 22 Jun 2002 08:41:15 -0400 Received: from smtpzilla2.xs4all.nl ([194.109.127.138]:9491 "EHLO smtpzilla2.xs4all.nl") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Sat, 22 Jun 2002 08:41:14 -0400 Date: Sat, 22 Jun 2002 14:41:01 +0200 (CEST) From: Roman Zippel X-X-Sender: roman@serv To: Larry McVoy cc: Horst von Brand , Daniel Phillips , Linux Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: Linux, the microkernel (was Re: latest linus-2.5 BK broken) In-Reply-To: <20020621182337.T23670@work.bitmover.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1191 Lines: 27 Hi, On Fri, 21 Jun 2002, Larry McVoy wrote: > On Fri, Jun 21, 2002 at 09:07:10PM -0400, Horst von Brand wrote: > > Right. If they had designed it for 4/8 CPUs from the start, they would > > surely have gotten it dead wrong. Just to find out how wrong around now... > > I couldn't disagree more. The reason that all the SMP threaded OS's start > to suck is that managers say "Yeah, one CPU is good but how about 2?" Then > a year goes by and then they say "Yeah, 2 CPUs are good but how about 4?". > Etc. So the system is never designed, it is hacked. It's no wonder they > suck. That's the important difference here, we have no managers forcing us to specific goals. We have the time to develop a good solution, we are not forced to accept a solution which sucks. We have the freedom to constantly break the kernel and we don't have to maintain backwards compability, which especially with regard to locking would really suck. 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/