Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2014 06:08:46 +0000 From: "Poul-Henning Kamp" <phk@phk.freebsd.dk> To: Julian Elischer <julian@freebsd.org> Cc: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: PoC: passive serialization Message-ID: <25392.1403503726@critter.freebsd.dk> In-Reply-To: <53A7A2D6.30905@freebsd.org> References: <539FEBC1.5030501@FreeBSD.org> <20140621231853.394A914A2D0@mail.netbsd.org> <53A7A2D6.30905@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message <53A7A2D6.30905@freebsd.org>, Julian Elischer writes: >On 6/22/14, 7:18 AM, Mindaugas Rasiukevicius wrote: >> >> Just a note on passive serialization in NetBSD: there is a lot of space for >> optimisations, simplifications or improvements to that code, but it was a >> deliberate choice to avoid them. The goal was to carefully implement the >> logic described in the expired patent (or at least attempt to be as close as >> our interpretation skills allow us to be). Any deviation from that logic >> increases the risk of falling under some other technique, primarily RCU, >> covered by other patent. >> >hopefully the recent ruling on software patents may make the whole >thing moot given enough impetus. Probably not in this case. This bite from page 3 seems like the gate through which RCU and similar patents will go: "They do not, for example, purport to improve the functioning of the computer itself" But read for yourself: http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/13pdf/13-298_7lh8.pdf -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 phk@FreeBSD.ORG | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?25392.1403503726>