From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Mon, 6 May 2002 15:20:51 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Mon, 6 May 2002 15:20:51 -0400 Received: from hq.fsmlabs.com ([209.155.42.197]:60941 "EHLO hq.fsmlabs.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Mon, 6 May 2002 15:20:50 -0400 From: Cort Dougan Date: Mon, 6 May 2002 13:18:04 -0600 To: Diego Calleja Cc: John Stoffel , Dan Kegel , "David S. Miller" , khttpd-users@alt.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Tux in main kernel tree? (was khttpd rotten?) Message-ID: <20020506131804.G13077@host110.fsmlabs.com> In-Reply-To: <3CD5ECEE.E6C0B894@kegel.com> <15574.52864.321544.44124@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <20020506210727.4ed05ba1.DiegoCG@teleline.es> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org I put MPI in the kernel and got a huge performance advantage from it. I think that was a valuable idea and the results show that's definitely the case. I don't think the argument could ever be made that it belongs in the main kernel, though. A separate project with a loadable module is definitely the way to go for these things. "Keep that out of my kernel" is an old operating system design adage that isn't paid attention to enough. } > An httpd server is a *user space* issue, not a kernel issue. } } It's true. But I'd be an idiot if I can improve performance and I don't do it. } } However, if an httpd can be as fast as an kernel space httpd it'd be a bad thing to put it } in kernel space.