Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 33

Thread: The Big Linux 2.6.35 Kernel Problem Is Fixed

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    52

    Default

    Here's a tip Michael, try running the PTS on older kernels (I'm talking 2.6.0, 2.6.5, etc..) and see if there are any regressions that came unnoticed.
    Would also be an interesting read to see how the kernel has matured, whether they are adding stuff at the cost of performance or the performance keeps improving too(or at least not degrading as much).

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    574

    Default

    I'm getting sick of people complaining about Michael's work.
    They really don't realize how is work somehow contributes to the Linux world.

    I'm sure though that the Linux Kernel developers appreciate his work, and that's the only thing that matters.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Connecticut,USA
    Posts
    962

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bulletxt View Post
    I'm getting sick of people complaining about Michael's work.
    They really don't realize how is work somehow contributes to the Linux world.

    I'm sure though that the Linux Kernel developers appreciate his work, and that's the only thing that matters.
    Amen. Michael's work is a great service to the kernel devs as it highlights issues that negatively impact the kernel long before it goes live

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    44

    Default Just Don't Claim the Sky Is Falling

    Quote Originally Posted by DeepDayze View Post
    Amen. Michael's work is a great service to the kernel devs as it highlights issues that negatively impact the kernel long before it goes live
    Michael's work is fine. Highlighting issues that negatively impact the kernel before it goes live is great. Claiming that the sky is falling when such issues pop up in a pre-release seems a bit silly. Issues like this at alpha/beta stages are par for the course. Point them out in a matter of fact manner and nobody will call you out for it; the issues will just get fixed.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,726

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by diegocg View Post
    "To us at least, it still is a real problem that such a regression can be introduced in the mainline kernel and live there for a number of days without being addressed -- especially when it negatively affects the operating system's performance in so many different areas."

    Well, I strongly disagree. It's not a "problem" that such regressions can be introduced. Of course, it's a bug that must be solved, but there is nothing strange or atypical with finding such bugs in a pre-rc1 git snapshot. That's why -rcx releases exist. That's why there are three months of kernel development. To find such bugs. So there is nothing "unexpected" here, a bug was found (which, BTW, is far from being a critical bug), and it was fixed. Big deal.

    In fact, if you _really_ follow the kernel development (which phoronix editors don't seem to do), there are always several reverts of commits that introduce bugs that are detected in -rc releases. If you need a tree that merges bug fixes immediately then the Linus tree is not for you, because Linus may take a week off to go to some conference or because of holidays or things like that. It's also not strange that an important fix may get delayed just because people is discussing how it must be fixed. At this stage, you are expected to report bugs, test and apply the corresponding bugfix patches yourself.

    In other words. Can Phoronix stop doing ridiculous claims the next time? You _will_ find performance regressions and bugs in 2.6.26-pre-rc1 if you search them, and in 2.6.27-pre-rc1, and in 2.6.28-pre-rc1. It's a good thing if you want to become a kernel tester, but they aren't interesting news.
    to make matter worse, Phoronix didn't care to report the bug. It was fixed because OTHER people found and reported it. Really, Phoronix failed hard and blames devs for a bug that didn't even survived -rc1. That is low.

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,726

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DeepDayze View Post
    Amen. Michael's work is a great service to the kernel devs as it highlights issues that negatively impact the kernel long before it goes live
    so where is the email from Michael to lkml reporting that bug? Oh wait! It was never sent!

    The 'issue' was found independently by several people. But the only one who did nothing about it but writing an acerbic article was Michael. There is no service in doing so. Quite the opposite. Acting like this hurts linux development.

    Next time report bugs first, then write article. Then there might be any worth in phoronix testing.

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,726

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bulletxt View Post
    I'm getting sick of people complaining about Michael's work.
    They really don't realize how is work somehow contributes to the Linux world.

    I'm sure though that the Linux Kernel developers appreciate his work, and that's the only thing that matters.
    no, they don't appreciate 'his work'.

    http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=127535359014939&w=2

    Well thats kinda obvious, its "journalism" in the days of google
    adwords. They make revenue by making people click on their website,
    they don't make money being useful or interacting with others.
    Phoronix in all the years I've been dealing with them as the only
    place doing any reporting on graphics, have never once confirmed a
    source, asked for information directly or anything you'd expect from
    real journalists, again because that doesn't drive page hits, whereas
    sensationalist useless headlines are the main point of the site.

    Dave.


    And David Airlie's work has been constantly mentioned here.

    If you don't report the bugs you see, all you do is worthless for kernel devs. And if you write inflammatory articles instead, you are hurting development actively.

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    147

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by energyman View Post
    no, they don't appreciate 'his work'.

    http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=127535359014939&w=2

    Well thats kinda obvious, its "journalism" in the days of google
    adwords. They make revenue by making people click on their website,
    they don't make money being useful or interacting with others.
    Phoronix in all the years I've been dealing with them as the only
    place doing any reporting on graphics, have never once confirmed a
    source, asked for information directly or anything you'd expect from
    real journalists, again because that doesn't drive page hits, whereas
    sensationalist useless headlines are the main point of the site.

    Dave.


    And David Airlie's work has been constantly mentioned here.

    If you don't report the bugs you see, all you do is worthless for kernel devs. And if you write inflammatory articles instead, you are hurting development actively.
    It is not Michael's job to report bugs. His job is to run this site.

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    912

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by zoomblab View Post
    It is not Michael's job to report bugs. His job is to run this site.
    I do like there being some automated tests. That's great, it's nice, it could be very useful.
    But the article was misleading at best, and closer to trouble making and trolling than that. The reasons why have already been thoroughly discussed. And if the phoronix test suite is going to be useful to kernel development and catching bugs in general (like phoronix keeps harping on about) then they've got to show how useful it can be - and that involves reporting bugs.
    Credit where credit is due (great work on the test suite and all), but criticism where it's due as well.

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Vienna, Austria; Germany; hello world :)
    Posts
    637

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mirv View Post
    I do like there being some automated tests. That's great, it's nice, it could be very useful.
    But the article was misleading at best, and closer to trouble making and trolling than that. The reasons why have already been thoroughly discussed. And if the phoronix test suite is going to be useful to kernel development and catching bugs in general (like phoronix keeps harping on about) then they've got to show how useful it can be - and that involves reporting bugs.
    Credit where credit is due (great work on the test suite and all), but criticism where it's due as well.
    ++

    Oh and BTW stop being PUSSIES and take it like a man - I'm not trying (or in any way) am directly offending Michael or anyone of you

    take/see constructive criticism as a gift and opportunity to improve instead of an opportunity to whine and taking offense in statements where there is no insult

    how goes the saying: with great power comes great responsibility ?

    and in this context responsibility means reporting it to the devs

    if you're not willing to post a lengthy article on lkml or any other well-known group just post a short message & link to this article and that should be enough

    why on earth is anyone in the F/OSS world so quickly hurt in their "pride" ?

Posting Permissions

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