[ros-dev] Short leave of absence

[Casper Hornstrup]

Will you ever knowledge that rewriting large parts of ReactOS in your working copy
causes all sorts of problems, and start getting the changes into the repository in
smaller chunks or will you ignore these problems and continue to do this in the
future?

Casper

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ros-dev-bounces at reactos.com [mailto:ros-dev-bounces at reactos.com] On Behalf Of Alex Ionescu
> Sent: 6. april 2005 00:11
> To: ReactOS Development List
> Subject: [ros-dev] Short leave of absence
> 
> Hi,
> 
> I am currently entering the last 5 weeks of school of my last year, so
> I'm going to be focusing on that instead of ReactOS. Lately, I've tried
> to work on both, but this has delayed my code as well as hurt my grades.
> I intend to be back around the week of May 10th.
> 
> In the meanwhile, I would kindly like to ask developers to e-mail me if
> they have any plans to touch the following:
> 
> - Kernel Scheduler, Thread Creation, Context Switching, System
> Initialization. I have re-written everything for a faster and more
> complete system based on NT semantics. Includes everything from realtime
> support, proper dynamic and static priorities, real system thread
> support, much faster scheduling, pre-emption, removal of the PEB/TEB 64K
> block hack and ros-only members, better organized code and Mm routines
> for manipulating kernel stack/teb/peb, etc...
> 
> - Pushlocks. I have almost all the necessary support code written and
> I'm only missing one function.
> 
> - IRQL management in HAL and Spinlocks. I have highly modified the IRQL
> routines for a large increase in speed, as well as made spinlocks faster
> on UP and non-debug builds. I have also corrected some IRQL routines to
> use the proper KPCR members for the IRR and others.
> 
> - Object Manager. I have a complete re-write in progress which uses
> public NT structures instead of our internal ones, adds more security,
> and corrects some missing features and adds some. Majorly changes some
> aspects of the Ob (for example regarding on the status of handle/pointer
> count after creating an object, and the work of ObCreate/ObInsertObject,
> which is totally different in ROS vs NT. See blog article for more
> info). However, any bugs that are easy to fix should still be fixed in
> the current Ob. The new one is months away.
> 
> - Queued Spin Locks, KGATES, Guarded Mutex. I already know Filip is
> working on this and I was planning on collaborating with him. Unlike the
> previous things, I haven't actually *coded* anything regarding these,
> but I have the design in my head and would like to work on it, so I
> would love to share what I know if anyone is actively interested in
> working on it.
> 
> Once again, to clear up any misconceptions, I'm asking an email to know
> if anyone plans to work on this for the purposes of:
> 1) Not duplicating work
> 2) Sharing what information/code I might have written.
> 
> In any case, I'll be back in exactly one month, so I don't think it'll
> matter. You guys keep focusing on PnP and other stuff meanwhile, okay?
> *joke*
> 
> Best regards,
> Alex Ionescu
> _______________________________________________
> Ros-dev mailing list
> Ros-dev at reactos.com
> http://reactos.com:8080/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev