Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Sat, 29 Sep 2001 09:45:04 -0700 (PDT) | From | John Alvord <> | Subject | Re: 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/
|  |