[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1251322453.3882.44.camel@raz>
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 2009 00:34:13 +0300
From: raz ben yehuda <raziebe@...il.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux-foundation.org>, mingo@...e.hu,
peterz@...radead.org, maximlevitsky@...il.com, cfriesen@...tel.com,
efault@....de, riel@...hat.com, wiseman@...s.biu.ac.il,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-rt-users@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: RFC: THE OFFLINE SCHEDULER
On Wed, 2009-08-26 at 13:50 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Wed, 26 Aug 2009 16:40:09 -0400 (EDT)
> Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
>
> > Peter has not given a solution to the problem. Nor have you.
>
> What problem?
>
> All I've seen is "I want 100% access to a CPU". That's not a problem
> statement - it's an implementation.
>
> What is the problem statement?
>
>
> My take on these patches: the kernel gives userspace unmediated access
> to memory resources if it wants that. The kernel gives userspace
> unmediated access to IO devices if it wants that. But for some reason
> people freak out at the thought of providing unmediated access to CPU
> resources.
>
> Don't get all religious about this. If the change is clean,
> maintainable and useful then there's no reason to not merge it.
thank you Mr Morton. thank you !!!
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists