Messages in this thread |  | | | Date | Sat, 28 Sep 2002 18:31:45 -0700 (PDT) | | From | Linus Torvalds <> | | Subject | Re: v2.6 vs v3.0 |
| |
On Sat, 28 Sep 2002, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > i consider the VM and IO improvements one of the most important things > that happened in the past 5 years - and it's definitely something that > users will notice. Finally we have a top-notch VM and IO subsystem (in > addition to the already world-class networking subsystem) giving > significant improvements both on the desktop and the server - the jump > from 2.4 to 2.5 is much larger than from eg. 2.0 to 2.4.
Hey, _if_ people actually are universally happy with the VM in the current 2.5.x tree, I'll happily call the dang thing 5.0 or whatever (just kidding, but yeah, that would be a good enough reason to bump the major number).
However, I'll believe that when I see it. Usually people don't complain during a development kernel, because they think they shouldn't, and then when it becomes stable (ie when the version number changes) they are surprised that the behabviour didn't magically improve, and _then_ we get tons of complaints about how bad the VM is under their load.
Am I hapyy with current 2.5.x? Sure. Are others? Apparently. But does that mean that we have a top-notch VM and we should bump the major number? I wish.
The block IO cleanups are important, and that was the major thing _I_ personally wanted from the 2.5.x tree when it was opened. I agree with you there. But I don't think they are major-number-material.
Anyway, people who are having VM trouble with the current 2.5.x series, please _complain_, and tell what your workload is. Don't sit silent and make us think we're good to go.. And if Ingo is right, I'll do the 3.0.x thing.
Linus
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
|  |