lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2010]   [Jul]   [11]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: stable? quality assurance?

    ----- "Eric Dumazet" <eric.dumazet@gmail.com> wrote:

    > Le dimanche 11 juillet 2010 à 09:18 +0200, Martin Steigerwald a écrit
    > :
    > > Hi!
    > >
    > > 2.6.34 was a desaster for me: bug #15969 - patch was availble before
    >
    > > 2.6.34 already, bug #15788, also reported with 2.6.34-rc2 already,
    > as well
    > > as most important two complete lockups - well maybe just X.org and
    > radeon
    > > KMS, I didn't start my second laptop to SSH into the locked up one -
    > on my
    > > ThinkPad T42. I fixed the first one with the patch, but after the
    > lockups I
    > > just downgraded to 2.6.33 again.
    > >
    > > I still actually *use* my machines for something else than hunting
    > patches
    > > for kernel bugs and on kernel.org it is written "Latest *Stable*
    > Kernel"
    > > (accentuation from me). I know of the argument that one should use a
    >
    > > distro kernel for machines that are for production use. But frankly,
    > does
    > > that justify to deliver in advance known crap to the distributors?
    > What
    > > impact do partly grave bugs reported on bugzilla have on the release
    >
    > > decision?
    > >
    > > And how about people who have their reasons - mine is TuxOnIce - to
    >
    > > compile their own kernels?
    > >
    > > Well 2.6.34.1 fixed the two reported bugs and it seemed to have
    > fixed the
    > > freezes as well. So far so good.
    > >
    > > Maybe it should read "prerelease of stable" for at least 2.6.34.0 on
    > the
    > > website. And I just again always wait for .2 or .3, as with 2.6.34.1
    > I
    > > still have some problems like the hang on hibernation reported in
    > >
    > > hang on hibernation with kernel 2.6.34.1 and TuxOnIce 3.1.1.1
    > >
    > > on this mailing list just a moment ago. But then 2.6.33 did hang
    > with
    > > TuxOnIce which apparently (!) wasn't a TuxOnIce problem either,
    > since
    > > 2.6.34 did not hang with it anymore which was a reason for me to try
    >
    > > 2.6.34 earlier.
    > >
    > > I am quite a bit worried about the quality of the recent kernels.
    > Some
    > > iterations earlier I just compiled them, partly even rc-ones which I
    > do
    > > not expact to be table, and they just worked. But in the recent
    > times .0,
    > > partly even .1 or .2 versions haven't been stable for me quite some
    > times
    > > already and thus they better not be advertised as such on kernel.org
    > I
    > > think. I am willing to risk some testing and do bug reports, but
    > these are
    > > still production machines, I do not have any spare test machines,
    > and
    > > there needs to be some balance, i.e. the kernels should basically
    > work.
    > > Thus I for sure will be more reluctant to upgrade in the future.
    > >
    > > Ciao,
    >
    > Anybody running latest kernel on a production machine is living
    > dangerously. Dont you already know that ?
    >
    > When 2.6.X is released, everybody knows it contains at least 100
    > bugs.
    >
    > It was true for all previous values of X, it will be true for all
    > futures values.
    >
    > If you want to be safer, use a one year old kernel, with all stable
    > patches in.
    >
    > Something like 2.6.32.16 : Its probably more stable than all 2.6.X
    > kernels.

    2.6.32.16 (possibly 2.6.32.15) has a regression where it is unusable
    as a Xen domU. I would say 2.6.32.12 is the best choice since who knows
    what other regressions there are in .16.

    William
    --
    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/

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2010-07-11 18:07    [W:0.036 / U:0.348 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site