Linux-kernel mailing list archive 2000-26,: Re: Low Latency Patch

# Re: Low Latency Patch

Michael Borrelli (mike@cc237069-b.brick1.nj.home.com)
Sat, 1 Jul 2000 08:52:22 -0400 (EDT)

- Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
- Next message: Andi Kleen: "Re: spinlocks() are severely broken in 2.2.X and 2.4.X for modules"
- Previous message: James Simmons: "Re: console_lock too early in printk???"
- Next in thread: Robert Dinse: "Re: Low Latency Patch"
- Reply: Robert Dinse: "Re: Low Latency Patch"

Robert Dinse said this...
> I am a heavy user of Linux however, and I hope that the development
>community is not disinterested in input from the user community. If that is
>not the case, then Linux is dead.

I think that the fact that Linux does accept so much input from the
user/hacker communities is the reason it has gone on so well.

> If you ignore the needs of the end users, pretty soon you don't have a
>user community anymore.

(see above) I've notice how the end user is treated very well,
actually.

> But for me alone? Don't fix it, leave it broken if it looks prettier.
>But I would suggest that people who haven't tried the patch because they don't
>have a need for realtime performance, particularly if they have occasionally
>heavily loaded boxes, try it.

Why not try to make your code 'prettier' and then resubmit it? No sense
yelling at others for saying they don't like the way it looks. If it
works well, fix the looks so that it is 1) neat 2) maintainable.

-mb

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

- Next message: Andi Kleen: "Re: spinlocks() are severely broken in 2.2.X and 2.4.X for modules"
- Previous message: James Simmons: "Re: console_lock too early in printk???"
- Next in thread: Robert Dinse: "Re: Low Latency Patch"
- Reply: Robert Dinse: "Re: Low Latency Patch"