On Thu, 8 May 2008, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:Right. So what? It's still about a million times faster than what the code does now. You comment about "great smp scalability optimization" just shows that you're a moron. It is no such thing. The fact is, it's a horrible pessimization, since even SMP will be *SLOWER*. It will just be "less slower" when you have a million CPU's and they all try to do this at the same time (which probably never ever happens). In other words, "scalability" is totally meaningless. The only thing that matters is *performance*. If the "scalable" version performs WORSE, then it is simply worse. Not better. End of story. So what you're saying is that performance doesn't matter? So why do you do the ugly crazy hundred-line implementation, when a simple two-liner would do equally well? Your arguments are crap. Anyway, discussion over. This code doesn't get merged. It doesn't get merged before 2.6.26, and it doesn't get merged _after_ either. Rewrite the code, or not. I don't care. I'll very happily not merge crap for the rest of my life. Linus --
| Dave Hansen | [RFC][PATCH 0/4] kernel-based checkpoint restart |
| Greg KH | [GIT PATCH] driver core patches against 2.6.24 |
| Bart Van Assche | Integration of SCST in the mainstream Linux kernel |
| Eric Paris | [RFC 0/5] [TALPA] Intro to a linux interface for on access scanning |
git: | |
| David Miller | Re: [GIT]: Networking |
| Natalie Protasevich | [BUG] New Kernel Bugs |
| Gerrit Renker | [PATCH 27/37] dccp: Integration of dynamic feature activation - part 2 (server side) |
| Jarek Poplawski | Re: [PATCH] pkt_sched: Destroy gen estimators under rtnl_lock(). |
