Re: [microblaze-uclinux] Thinking about the 2.6 kernel

[Matthew Rubenstein <email@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

	One major improvement in kernel2.6 over kernel2.4 is the scheduler.
This is a core kernel service that could most benefit from parallelism,
compared to other services. The project that ports the 2.6 scheduler to
the uCLinux/microblaze could become the basis for porting the scheduler
directly to the FPGA. That kind of research positions uC/mb to reap
serious benefit in all the development arenas that this overall project
touches.


On Thu, 2006-01-19 at 08:48 +1000, John Williams wrote:
> Hi folks,
> 
> The most common question I seem to get these days is "When will you do a
> 2.6 kernel port for MicroBlaze?".
> 
> My answer is generally the same - "It's on the radar, but no firm
> plans".  Basically I need some pretty good reasons to commit the time
> and energy into a new kernel port.  Remember it's not just
> linux-2.6.x/arch/microblaze, there's drivers to consider, and changes to
> auto-config architecture and so on.
> 
> So, here's your chance.  Convince me that a 2.6 port is the way to go.
> Good reasons, bad reasons, technical reasons, marketing reasons - all
> will be entertained.  I'm open to counter-arguments too, if you think
> it's *not* worth doing.
> 
> Let's see what you've got!
> 
> John
> 
> 
> ___________________________
> microblaze-uclinux mailing list
> microblaze-uclinux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Project Home Page : http://www.itee.uq.edu.au/~jwilliams/mblaze-uclinux
> Mailing List Archive : http://www.itee.uq.edu.au/~listarch/microblaze-uclinux/
> 
-- 

(C) Matthew Rubenstein

___________________________
microblaze-uclinux mailing list
microblaze-uclinux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Project Home Page : http://www.itee.uq.edu.au/~jwilliams/mblaze-uclinux
Mailing List Archive : http://www.itee.uq.edu.au/~listarch/microblaze-uclinux/