Re: [gentoo-dev] low-latency vs. pre-emptible

[Daniel Robbins]

On Thu, 2002-01-24 at 17:37, Nathan Myers wrote:
> I notice Gentoo is using RML's pre-emptible kernel instead of
> Andrew Morton's low-latency kernel, despite both Linus's and
> Alan's recommendation of the latter.  Maybe it would be worth
> posting a position paper (or comment) about why.  If not, I'm
> curious, anyway.  (ISTM that the low-latency patch should be much
> less hazardous, and ought to be substantially more efficient on
> single-CPU systems anyway.)

We're probably going to go back to low-latency, although the two can be
complementary sometimes.

For a server, we'll probably do:
	XFS CVS kernel
	+IO read latency fixes from Andrew Morton
	+low-latency
	+rmap (these include the above-mentioned IO read latency fixes)
	+O(1)?

Desktop will probably be similar but we may include a few more things.

-- 
Daniel Robbins                                  <drobbins@g.o>
Chief Architect/President                       http://www.gentoo.org 
Gentoo Technologies, Inc.