Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Fri, 21 Jun 2002 21:14:38 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Fri, 21 Jun 2002 21:14:37 -0400 Received: from chac.inf.utfsm.cl ([200.1.19.54]:4612 "EHLO chac.inf.utfsm.cl") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Fri, 21 Jun 2002 21:14:33 -0400 Message-Id: <200206220107.g5M17AXp028825@sleipnir.valparaiso.cl> To: Daniel Phillips cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: Linux, the microkernel (was Re: latest linus-2.5 BK broken) In-reply-to: Your message of "Fri, 21 Jun 2002 22:25:22 +0200." X-mailer: MH [Version 6.8.4] X-charset: ISO_8859-1 Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2002 21:07:10 -0400 From: Horst von Brand Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1284 Lines: 25 [Cc:s heavily snipped] Daniel Phillips said: > On Friday 21 June 2002 20:46, Cort Dougan wrote: > > I don't see Linux being in serious jeopardy in the short-term of becoming > > solaris. It only aims at running on 1-4 processors and does a pretty good > > job of that. Most sane people realize, as Larry points out, that the > > current design will not scale to 64 processors and beyond. That's obvious, > > it's not an alarmist or deep statement. The key is to realize that it's > > not _meant_ to scale that high right now. > > And originally, it was never meant to scale to more than one processor. 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... If 64-way becomes commodity one day in whatever form the hardware people dream up, Linux will surely follow. -- Horst von Brand vonbrand@sleipnir.valparaiso.cl Casilla 9G, Vin~a del Mar, Chile +56 32 672616 - 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/