On Fri, Feb 16, 2007 at 11:20:36PM +0300, Cyrill V. Gorcunov ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > On Fri, Feb 16, 2007 at 07:58:54PM +0300, Evgeniy Polyakov wrote: > | Absolutely. > | And if overall system design is good, there is no problem to change > | (well, for those who fail to read to the end and understand my english > | replace 'to change' with 'to create and commit') interface to the state > | where it will satisfy all (majority of) users. > | > | Situations when system is designed from interface down to system ends up > | with one thread per IO and huge limitations on how system is going to be > | used at all. > | > | -- > | Evgeniy Polyakov > > I'm sorry for meddling in conversation but I think Linus misunderstood > you. If I'm right you propose to "create and commit" _new_ interfaces > only? I mean _changing_ of interfaces exported to user space is > very painfull... for further support. Don't swear at me if I wrote > something stupid ;)
Yes, I only proposed to change what Ingo has right now - although it is usable, but it does suck, but since overall syslet design is indeed good it does not suffer from possible interface changes - so I said that it can be trivially changed in that regard that until it is committed anything can be done to extend it. > -- > > Cyrill -- Evgeniy Polyakov - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/