Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 19 Jun 1998 17:16:24 +0200 | From | Hubert Tonneau <> | Subject | Improving kernel stability and Linux usability with a shared boot option |
| |
To every Linux kernel user ...
As Linux kernel is getting mature, there are more and more places where a choice as to be done between a more efficient skeem or a more conservative one. Let's take a few exemples:
- using PIO or DMA in some network drivers - using XT-PIC or IO-APIC on SMP boxes - enabeling SCSI tag queuing and chosing the highest speed on the SCSI bus or the more conservative 5Mb/s
It seems to me that time as now come (before 2.2 for sure) to add a single boot option (witch could be called 'safe') that would ask any part of the kernel and any driver to use the most conservative skeem instead of the most efficient one (when the difference is clear).
Moreover, we would ask to any part of the code that changed it's behaviour due to this flag to display a kernel message saying in witch readme file one can find additional informations about the peticular alternative so that reading the boot report allow the user to discover any choice he has when operating the kernel on his peticular computer, and what he has to read in order to operate it properly:
There would be several short term benefits: - Easyer to get a stable Linux kernel for entry level users, so better speading of Linux since any new user that fail to install it's first kernel is a lost user ... - Better reporting in kernel mail list since except Linus, Alan, and a few others that seem to know everything about the kernel, most advanced user could learn at once all the possible kernel alernative on any peticular box, then read the revelent README's and finaly search through using individual boot parameters witch exact alternative get the machine into troubles and report more precisely than 'kernel 2.1.x locks on my computer'
As a conclusion, i would say that the current way of releasing frequent kernel works very fine if we change only one feature in each realease and everybody checks each release, witch is less and less possible since: - as the kernel is getting bigger, and there are more and more hackers, we need to change many things at once. - since quite stable and full features kernel already exist, most advanced users are jumping over several releases. This is proved by the fact that many reports are not concerning the latest release.
As a sumary, we (advanceds users) now need a more efficient way to test changes in the kernel to better report to you (hackers), or each serie will get longer and harder to get stable than the previous one.
What's above is just a preposal. It's now Linus time to speak.
Hubert Tonneau
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
| |