Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: Portable binary modules | Date | Thu, 2 Dec 1999 17:03:14 +0000 (GMT) | From | Alan Cox <> |
| |
> Something I have wondered about for a while is how difficult would it be to > make SMP modules run in a non-SMP kernel. Is it as easy as having the UP > kernels provide dummy locking functions which always say they aquired a lock > but dont really try?
Not at the binary level. Our uniprocessor builds make most spinlocks become null code or local cli/sti instructions. That avoids us taking the performance hit. It also means that the locks the SMP module wants to use are not actually there in truth.
Alan
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |