From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Feb 19 08:32:22 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 392A916A4CE for ; Thu, 19 Feb 2004 08:32:22 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.qubesoft.com (gate.qubesoft.com [217.169.36.34]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B5B9343D1D for ; Thu, 19 Feb 2004 08:32:21 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from dfr@nlsystems.com) Received: from bluebottle.qubesoft.com (bluebottle.qubesoft.com [192.168.1.2]) by mail.qubesoft.com (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id i1JGWJ8g073058; Thu, 19 Feb 2004 16:32:20 GMT (envelope-from dfr@nlsystems.com) Received: from builder02.qubesoft.com (builder02.qubesoft.com [192.168.1.8]) i1JGWIsD088287; Thu, 19 Feb 2004 16:32:19 GMT (envelope-from dfr@nlsystems.com) From: Doug Rabson To: Peter A Jonsson In-Reply-To: References: <1077137806.28133.10.camel@herring.nlsystems.com> Content-Type: text/plain Message-Id: <1077208338.9856.1.camel@builder02.qubesoft.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.4.0 Date: 19 Feb 2004 16:32:18 +0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit cc: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Read Copy Update X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2004 16:32:22 -0000 On Thu, 2004-02-19 at 16:26, Peter A Jonsson wrote: > > I imagine that a FreeBSD implementation of RCU wouldn't actually be too > > hard and it might be well worth it as an alternative way of managing > > concurrency, e.g. for the routing cache and the name cache (and probably > > lots of other things). > > Alan Cox pointed out[1] that there was a patent problem (US Patent > #05442758 [2]) with RCU which prevented inclusion in the Linux > kernel. This was solved[3] by granting the right to use it in GPL > software according to my understanding. Isn't this a problem for > FreeBSD? That would be a problem unless the patent owner (Sequent, i.e. IBM) could be encouraged to grant a similar license for BSD software.