> I think you should have frozen development in 2.0 on features who
> cannot reach production quality on it. I am as eager as everyone in
> getting SMP but this has broken 2.0 in at least one occasion and will
> be usable (that is robust and fast) only in 2.1. IMHO these parts
SMP is robust and fast for somekinds of jobs already, and robust and not
fast enough on others. Nothing has happend with SMP of note since 1.3.8x.
For 2.1 it will start to happen again providing we can address issues like
allowing 1Gb of RAM on the intel machines and restructuring some of
the driver code and layers like SCSI a bit to sort stuff out.
Alan
1GB of RAM Waow! Last time I checked in Documentation/SMP.txt (in
2.0.x) I read something about doing a backup first so I deduced it
was still very alpha. I am eager about it. In fact I was thinking
in buying a dual Pentium (will change machine in January) if I can use
either Linux-SMP or normal Linux using only one CPU until Linux-SMP
stops needing backups :-)
But I saw recently something about a remapping of interrupts needed for
SMP had caused problems.
But I think the base of my observation reamins valid: not let 2.1 and
2.2 features break 2.0. Sorry for choosing SMP as an exemple.
--Jean Francois Martinez
Join the Free World side in the holy war against Microsoft's Evil Empire. (Ronald Reagan)