From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261401AbVFAO6U (ORCPT ); Wed, 1 Jun 2005 10:58:20 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261404AbVFAO6T (ORCPT ); Wed, 1 Jun 2005 10:58:19 -0400 Received: from ppp-217-133-42-200.cust-adsl.tiscali.it ([217.133.42.200]:62018 "EHLO g5.random") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261401AbVFAO6B (ORCPT ); Wed, 1 Jun 2005 10:58:01 -0400 Date: Wed, 1 Jun 2005 16:57:46 +0200 From: Andrea Arcangeli To: Ingo Molnar Cc: Paulo Marques , "Paul E. McKenney" , Esben Nielsen , James Bruce , Nick Piggin , "Bill Huey (hui)" , Andi Kleen , Sven-Thorsten Dietrich , dwalker@mvista.com, hch@infradead.org, akpm@osdl.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: RT patch acceptance Message-ID: <20050601145746.GK5413@g5.random> References: <20050531143051.GL5413@g5.random> <20050531161157.GQ5413@g5.random> <20050531183627.GA1880@us.ibm.com> <20050531204544.GU5413@g5.random> <429DA7AE.5000304@grupopie.com> <20050601135154.GF5413@g5.random> <20050601141919.GA9282@elte.hu> <20050601143202.GI5413@g5.random> <20050601144544.GA13936@elte.hu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20050601144544.GA13936@elte.hu> X-GPG-Key: 1024D/68B9CB43 13D9 8355 295F 4823 7C49 C012 DFA1 686E 68B9 CB43 User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.9i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Jun 01, 2005 at 04:45:44PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * Andrea Arcangeli wrote: > > > > you are wrong. This codepath is not running with interrupts disabled on > > > PREEMPT_RT. irqs-off spinlocks dont turn off interrupts on PREEMPT_RT. > > > > Then I'm afraid preempt-RT infringe on the patent [...] > > i'd have expected you to say "oops, i was wrong, thanks for the > explanation", but now you come up with a completely nontechnical topic > instead? Perhaps you didn't follow the story of RTAI, RTAI nanokernel adeos etc..etc.. has all been implemented to workaround that US patent. So to me redefining cli in any way has always been a no-way. Originally RTAI users were infringing and they've been forced to switch to nanokernel AFIK. In US patents exists, if you've a problem with that it's sure not me that you should talk with. I'd be very happy not having to come up with nontechnical topics. > of PREEMPT_RT - today you finally seem to have gotten closer to > understanding its basics ;-) ] You also got closer to learn how and why RT has developed in linux the way it did. The main confusion come from the fact your patch is obviously covered by the patent since you're redefinining cli, while I assumed it wasn't.