lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2001]   [Sep]   [29]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: kernel changes
On Sat, 29 Sep 2001, Ville Herva wrote:

> On Fri, Sep 28, 2001 at 02:32:05PM -0700, you [Pavel Zaitsev] said:
> > I have been watching development of 2.4 since 2.4.2, I wonder wether there
> > would be reversion to old process where kernel source will be solidified
> > before starting development branch.
>
> I think you can think of each new 2.4.x kernel as a candidate for
> solification. The part of the linux community a like me (and perhaps you?)

One aspect that bothers me is the absence of a success criteria. The
current competition for best VM is a good example. The fact is that every
operating system will fail with a high enough load. The best you can hope
for is a better degradation then the prior release. At the moment both
2.4.10 and 2.4.9-ac16 are better then 2.2.19. But people keep testing
under higher and higher loads and (surprise) they both fail... initiating
a search for better degradation logic.

Without a success criteria, this process cannot end.

Other examples are recent updates for multi-quad NUMA machines and changes
to handle locking problems on 8-way machines.

john alvord

-
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: 2005-03-22 13:03    [W:0.141 / U:0.056 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site