From: Andrew Morton <akpm@zip.com.au>
To: george anzinger <george@mvista.com>
Cc: Helge Hafting <helgehaf@idb.hist.no>,
Mike Fedyk <mfedyk@matchmail.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: low-latency patches
Date: Mon, 08 Oct 2001 11:24:33 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3BC1EF61.9ECD3273@zip.com.au> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20011006010519.A749@draal.physics.wisc.edu> <3BBEA8CF.D2A4BAA8@zip.com.au> <20011006150024.C2625@mikef-linux.matchmail.com> <3BC1A062.6E953751@idb.hist.no> <3BC1E53E.2A67202A@mvista.com>
george anzinger wrote:
>
> Well, no, but do we want to improve as kernel writers, or just stay
> "hackers"? If low latency was a concern the same way lack of dead locks
> and avoiding OOPs is today, don't you think we would be better coders?
> As for me, I want to shoot for the higher goal. Even if I miss, I will
> still have accomplished more than if I had shot for the mundane.
Right. It needs to be a conscious, planned decision: "from now on,
holding a lock for more than 500 usecs is a bug".
So someone, be it Linus, "the community" or my Mum needs to decide
that this is a feature which the kernel will henceforth support.
It's a new feature - it should be treated as such.
-
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2001-10-08 18:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2001-10-06 6:05 low-latency patches Bob McElrath
2001-10-06 6:46 ` Andrew Morton
2001-10-06 16:33 ` Daniel Phillips
2001-10-06 20:42 ` Bob McElrath
2001-10-06 22:00 ` Mike Fedyk
2001-10-06 22:22 ` Robert Love
2001-10-08 12:47 ` Helge Hafting
2001-10-08 17:41 ` george anzinger
2001-10-08 18:24 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2001-10-08 18:36 ` Alan Cox
2001-10-07 1:12 ` Robert Love
2001-10-07 2:38 ` Jeffrey W. Baker
2001-10-07 2:55 ` Robert Love
2001-10-06 22:36 ` Robert Love
2001-10-06 22:46 ` Mike Fedyk
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2001-10-10 15:27 David Balazic
2001-03-08 13:06 Andrew Morton
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=3BC1EF61.9ECD3273@zip.com.au \
--to=akpm@zip.com.au \
--cc=george@mvista.com \
--cc=helgehaf@idb.hist.no \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mfedyk@matchmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.