Re: [RFC] Small PCI core patch

Avi Kivity
2005-11-22T22:00:36Z

Diego Calleja wrote:

>El Tue, 22 Nov 2005 22:08:49 +0200,
>Avi Kivity <avi@argo.co.il> escribió:
>
>
>
>>None of the desktop Windows installations I'm aware of exhibit this. The
>>recent versions of Windows are fairly stable.
>>
>>
>
>You don't seem to check frecuently windows help forums, where some people
>speaks of nvidia as the number 1 "bluescreener"...
>
>Lots of windows drivers _are_ crappy. It's just a fact - some companies
>hire the wrong people. Some companies (like nvidia) get money from being
>fast, not from stability. This is a good example from a microsoft
>programmer about how some companies cheat the WHQL certification to
>get faster drivers...
>http://blogs.msdn.com/oldnewthing/archive/2004/03/05/84469.aspx
>
>This one about silent install of drivers by "smart" installers is fun
>too: http://blogs.msdn.com/oldnewthing/archive/2005/08/16/452141.aspx
>
>
>
Awsome. Certainly a very strong point against Windows drivers.

>
>
>>Many people have hyperthreaded CPUs today.
>>
>>
>
>Hypertreaded CPUs can't run the two virtual cpus at the same time,
>
>
Actually they are parallel at the instruction level. For the purpose of
SMP-safety they are the same as true SMP. They just have different
performance characterestics.

>>It works well on the server, where Linux has a large and rising market
>>
>>
>
>Linux didn't always have a large market share on servers. Again, history
>has shown that the path taken by linux until now is succesful.
>
>
I hope you're right. But desktops are more complex, more varied, and
have much more, er, interesting, users.

--
Do not meddle in the internals of kernels, for they are subtle and quick to panic.