* Issues for "CONFIG_PREEMPT"
@ 2004-05-09 4:26 Ernest L. Williams Jr.
2004-05-09 20:06 ` tabris
2004-05-10 0:02 ` Robert Love
0 siblings, 2 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Ernest L. Williams Jr. @ 2004-05-09 4:26 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-kernel; +Cc: ernesto
Hi,
Please CC me as I am not subscribed to the list.
Are the kernel developers working on the preemptive kernel in 2.6?
Initially the preempt patch was heavily advertised as one of the new
enhancements for the 2.6 kernel.
What is the current status? I am not able to find any "detailed"
information about this.
Could someone please summarize the issues and plans for the preempt
patch?
Thanks,
Ernesto
--
Ernest L. Williams Jr. <ernesto@ornl.gov>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: Issues for "CONFIG_PREEMPT"
2004-05-09 4:26 Issues for "CONFIG_PREEMPT" Ernest L. Williams Jr.
@ 2004-05-09 20:06 ` tabris
2004-05-10 0:02 ` Robert Love
1 sibling, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: tabris @ 2004-05-09 20:06 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Ernest L. Williams Jr.; +Cc: linux-kernel, Robert Love
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On Sunday 09 May 2004 12:26 am, Ernest L. Williams Jr. wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Please CC me as I am not subscribed to the list.
>
> Are the kernel developers working on the preemptive kernel in 2.6?
>
> Initially the preempt patch was heavily advertised as one of the new
> enhancements for the 2.6 kernel.
>
> What is the current status? I am not able to find any "detailed"
> information about this.
>
> Could someone please summarize the issues and plans for the preempt
> patch?
I believe the relevant point is that it is no longer a 'patch' but merged in
mainline 2.6. in fact, it was merged early-mid 2.5 (don't know the precise
version, didn't pay that much attn).
>
>
Unfortunately for those of us who still like the 2.4 kernel, the Preempt patch
for 2.4 (previously maintained by Robert Love) is, to my knowledge, no longer
maintained except by some distros. The official stance is that everybody
should go with 2.6. And as the preempt patch is not something that can be
trivially ported/maintained (requiring intimate knowledge of internals), it
shall likely remain so.
>
> Thanks,
> Ernesto
- --
tabris
- -
Hardware, n.:
The parts of a computer system that can be kicked.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFAno801U5ZaPMbKQcRAg/UAKClO/ZOAS27in6oXxg3AXY2y1Yp0ACgqYbm
kv9RoTF/qiO+GyIyoxKHjlE=
=kyiQ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: Issues for "CONFIG_PREEMPT"
2004-05-09 4:26 Issues for "CONFIG_PREEMPT" Ernest L. Williams Jr.
2004-05-09 20:06 ` tabris
@ 2004-05-10 0:02 ` Robert Love
1 sibling, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Robert Love @ 2004-05-10 0:02 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Ernest L. Williams Jr.; +Cc: linux-kernel
On Sun, 2004-05-09 at 00:26 -0400, Ernest L. Williams Jr. wrote:
> Could someone please summarize the issues and plans for the preempt
> patch?
It's been merged into 2.6 since 2.5.4.
Robert Love
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2004-05-10 0:02 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2004-05-09 4:26 Issues for "CONFIG_PREEMPT" Ernest L. Williams Jr.
2004-05-09 20:06 ` tabris
2004-05-10 0:02 ` Robert Love
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox