Contributed by johan on from the where-is-the-slackq dept.
In a recent mail to the tech mailing list David Gwynne (dlg@) is asking for tests of a diff that moves workqs from using spls to using mutexes.
Since this is the second time this is being attempted David emphasizes on the importance of getting this thoroughly tested on as many machines as possible, preferably machines that are quite busy.
Update (Thu, 30 Oct 2008 17:55:22 MDT): David has committed these changes. Thanks to everyone who tested!
(Comments are closed)
By Jim Razmus II (jim) jtr2-undeadly@bonetruck.org on http://www.bonetruck.org/
Jim
Comments
By Anonymous Coward (67.69.227.99) on
>
> Jim
I completely agree with you!
Comments
By Anonymous Coward (88.217.158.50) on
> >
> > Jim
>
> I completely agree with you!
i think mr.johnson is right about mr.johnson being right!
By tedu (67.111.202.11) on
>
> Jim
workqs make the kernel go. If you like your computer to go, you should like workqs. There's not much in the way of a user interface.
Comments
By Anonymous Coward (203.166.124.3) on
hmm. what if i don't like my computer to go? what happens then?
Comments
By tedu (udet) on
>
> hmm. what if i don't like my computer to go? what happens then?
run halt.
By Anonymous Coward (128.171.90.200) on
But my computer went prior to this patch, and hopefully still will afterwards.
By Daniel Gracia (paladdin) on http://www.alpuntodesal.com
>
> Jim
grep workq in the sources and take a look! This approach always works, and surely it'd teach us something interesting :)