Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2008 11:28:31 +0100 From: Alexander Leidinger <Alexander@Leidinger.net> To: Roman Divacky <rdivacky@FreeBSD.org> Cc: freebsd-emulation@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: [PATCH]: additional futex operations Message-ID: <20080321112831.p34g0r1uboo0gosk@webmail.leidinger.net> In-Reply-To: <20080320165024.GA83087@freebsd.org> References: <96317980@ipt.ru> <20080319204521.GA98846@freebsd.org> <20080320080703.ws5h2vaqskkw4w0s@webmail.leidinger.net> <20080320085122.GB32936@freebsd.org> <20080320111524.0j8stbuny84gwswc@webmail.leidinger.net> <20080320165024.GA83087@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Quoting Roman Divacky <rdivacky@FreeBSD.org> (from Thu, 20 Mar 2008 =20 17:50:24 +0100): >> The thought behind this is, that we can go from "should be" to "are". >> Doing a rate limited logging (print the message once) in -current (not >> in a MFC) should be enough to get a better idea. >> >> >Also.. if anyone is willing/able to implement the FD backing I think suc= h >> >person is skilled enough to see what is the problem even without the >> >printf. >> >> It's not about finding some to implement it, it's about getting _hard_ >> facts in our userbase. > > what is the point in getting to know that we dont implement FD backed > futexes? I already know that :) That's not the point. The point is to know which programs use this. If =20 we see that only a little tiny tools which nearly nobody uses wants to =20 use FD futexes, we don't care. But if some big software like Oracle, =20 DB2, Websphere (I don't say they use it and I don't say I think they =20 use it, that are just examples of the class of applications) or =20 something like this, then we should really have a look at implementing =20 them. > in a case of problems people should be running -DDEBUG linuxulator anyway. So far we told the users about stuff we don't implement without any =20 need to recompile. We should not change that. Specially as there are a =20 lot of users out there, which don't recompile a kernel at all. > I dont honestly think that anyone will ever implement the FD backed futexe= s > (too much work for basically null gain). I don't say the opposite, I just want to get hard facts to proof that =20 it is not necessary. Bye, Alexander. --=20 The meat is rotten, but the booze is holding out. Computer translation of "The spirit is willing, but the flesh is weak." http://www.Leidinger.net Alexander @ Leidinger.net: PGP ID =3D B0063FE7 http://www.FreeBSD.org netchild @ FreeBSD.org : PGP ID =3D 72077137
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20080321112831.p34g0r1uboo0gosk>