Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 31 May 2010 23:15:04 -0400 | From | Bill Davidsen <> | Subject | Re: Article in Phoronix about loss of performance in 2.6.35 release candidates |
| |
Robert Hancock wrote: > On 05/31/2010 05:19 PM, Alex Buell wrote: >> http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=14976 >> >> Question: Why? > > Good question.. I guess it would too much to ask of them to try to > figure out what area the problem lies in (even to the point of figuring > out if it's a CPU or IO-bound problem), or try to bisect, or at least > report it to LKML before going to the trouble of creating 5 pages of > graphs.. Given the 20x slowdown in some of the benchmarks you'd think it > wouldn't be too hard to narrow down.
That's true, but 20x should be too hard for people to detect when they do QA after creating a patch, before sending it to LKML in the first place, either. If such a regression made it to an -rc1 then it really is kind of a big deal. Of course Phoronics running the tests on netbook processors is probably a good thing, I doubt many developers and testers are compiling kernels on a rig like that, or doing much of anything else demanding.
I guess I would expect people to react with dismay to the fact that such a problem made it undetected to rc stage, but perhaps I have too much respect for developers. This looks more like "how dare they not keep it quiet and just tell us" indignation. In the end I doubt it makes a lot of difference, if someone posted to LKML and Slashdot picked it up, be sure it would have hit the media anyway.
Should any media keep a defect quiet when they make their living informing the readers? I see a lot of glee among Linux users every few days when a new Windows bug becomes public. Phoronics tested and reported, why is that less honorable than Tom's Hardware telling us a new CPU sucks?
-- Bill Davidsen <davidsen@tmr.com> "We have more to fear from the bungling of the incompetent than from the machinations of the wicked." - from Slashdot
| |