I'm sorry, I'm lost. You are quoting what I said, that's what I said
said, so what's the point? yes, for the third time, that's what I said
and that's what I meant.
> So, if these guys are smart, work hard and are professionals, why did they
> take bad design decisions ?
> Why didn't they implemented different solutions like, let's say "multiple
> independent OSs running on clusters of 4 CPUs" ?
Because, just like the prevailing wisdom in the Linux hackers, they thought
it would be relatively straightforward to get SMP to work. They started at
2, went to 4, etc., etc. Noone ever asked them to go from 1 to 100 in one
shot. It was always incremental.
I recently talked over the approach I have in mind with the architect of
Sun's multithreaded kernel, the guy who started and guided that effort at
Sun. He agreed that if he had thought of my approach he would have done
it that way. We both agreed it was unlikely that anyone would think of
that approach without first having done it the hard way.
----- Larry McVoy lm at bitmover.com http://www.bitmover.com/lm - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/