Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 31

Thread: Linux 2.6.33-rc1 Kernel Released

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    14,912

    Default Linux 2.6.33-rc1 Kernel Released

    Phoronix: Linux 2.6.33-rc1 Kernel Released

    Linus Torvalds has just announced that the merge window for the Linux 2.6.33 kernel has closed and as a result he has pushed out Linux 2.6.33-rc1. The first release candidate for Linux 2.6.33 delivers on a plethora of new code, including the long-awaited Nouveau driver (which Linus mentions in the 2.6.33-rc1 announcement) and many graphics DRM improvements...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=NzgyMQ

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    206

    Default

    I want to see the bfs scheduler for desktops, and by freaking default. Also where is reiser4 . I want to see Linus bitching for reiser4 inclusion on next widow merge like he did with nouveau. Hopefully ext4 performance is fixed.

  3. #3

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hax0r View Post
    I want to see the bfs scheduler for desktops, and by freaking default. Also where is reiser4 . I want to see Linus bitching for reiser4 inclusion on next widow merge like he did with nouveau. Hopefully ext4 performance is fixed.
    The thing is that a lot of people actually care about nouveau, but few care about reiser4. So why would Linus push hard for it?

    As for the bfs scheduler, dunno, but the case for it seems far weaker too -- it seems to help a bit in certain scenarios, but the kernel maintainers need to worry about all scenarios. Things like Con's tantrums, and the fanboy brigade that seems to descend on any thread mentioning bfs, don't exactly help either...

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    1,277

    Default

    I'm configuring now to play with new ATI goodness.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    598

    Default

    I wonder is Chris Mason got around to push raid10 and raid50 for btrfs.

    Or what was pushed for btrfs.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    in front of my box :p
    Posts
    797

    Default

    Oh well. First step done. Now there will be the long weeks of -rc# until I'll finally hold this baby in my arms. I mean, on my HDD. And I so much hope to see mesa 7.6.1 before christmas.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    338

    Default

    Does this mean that there will be no power management for radeon cards? If yes, I guess it also remains in staging...

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    332

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hax0r View Post
    I want to see the bfs scheduler for desktops, and by freaking default.
    i think using bfs should be a decision made by the distro maintainers not the kernel developers.

  9. #9

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pfanne View Post
    i think using bfs should be a decision made by the distro maintainers not the kernel developers.
    I wonder if it's useful on desktops now, because last time I tried it, it wasn't ready yet. Btw. I don't see a reason to have BFS included in mainline.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kraftman View Post
    I wonder if it's useful on desktops now, because last time I tried it, it wasn't ready yet. Btw. I don't see a reason to have BFS included in mainline.
    I've used BFS since it's announcement, and was initially "wowed" by it. I used it all the way up to BFS-311 on 2.6.31.6. I've recently moved to 2.6.32 and decided not to apply the BFS patches, and have yet to "feel" any difference. I'm someone who is constantly compiling stuff (read: qt 4.7 git), whilst web browsing, or watching videos, etc.. while I'm waiting and I can't honestly "feel" any difference between the schedulers, whereas before (vanilla 2.6.31) I could. It seems Con has made his point. I agree (based on my experience), there is no need for BFS in mainline at this point.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •