From: Kristis M. <kri...@as...> - 2004-11-15 22:22:29
|
> I don't think the patch is ready for general use, though. Both with > stuff we've discussed already, and the fact that these symbols are > appearing as the module name. To properly support dynamic code you'd I agree! If anyone is in the same kernel JIT shoes, feel free to point them my way. > have to add a "fake binary" facility similar to that discussed at length > in the Java threads. That might turn out to be a fair amount of work. Yes, I browsed through them and it appears to be a significant amount of work. When that happens (by others), work to add IPC can be extracted from this patch. > (Also, btw, you really shouldn't ever be using pthreads without thinking > carefully about your locking scheme...) Indeed. Unless you have a term paper to write ;) Cheers! |