Linked by Jordan Spencer Cunningham on Fri 10th Jul 2009 23:17 UTC
Linux "The Linux 2.6.31 kernel is still under active development until it is released later this quarter, but the merge window is closed and most of the work going on is to address bugs and other regressions within this massive code-base. Some of the key additions to the Linux 2.6.31 kernel include many graphics-related advancements (merging of the TTM memory manager, Radeon kernel mode-setting, Intel DisplayPort, etc), an ALSA driver for the Creative X-Fi, initial USB 3.0 support, file-system improvements, and much more. To see how the general system performance has been impacted by the new Linux kernel that is in development, we have a few benchmarks today."
Order by: Score:
Comment by diego
by diegoviola on Sat 11th Jul 2009 00:14 UTC
diegoviola
Member since:
2006-08-15

Amazing to see the progress being done on the releases, Linux is the best kernel/OS ever.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Comment by diego
by kad77 on Sat 11th Jul 2009 00:56 UTC in reply to "Comment by diego"
kad77 Member since:
2007-03-20

I don't know if you read the benchmarks, but almost every one showed a performance decrease over past kernels.

Also, best GPL licensed Kernel/OS ever maybe. To claim everything else in existence is inferior would be a stretch, to put in mildly.

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: Comment by diego
by kaiwai on Sat 11th Jul 2009 03:34 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by diego"
kaiwai Member since:
2005-07-06

I don't know if you read the benchmarks, but almost every one showed a performance decrease over past kernels.


If you take a brief look at the graphs you'll see that the throughput has increased but the latency has increased as well - it depends on what you wish to achieve when it comes to performance; do you want lower latency with lower throughput or higher throughput and higher latency?

Also, best GPL licensed Kernel/OS ever maybe. To claim everything else in existence is inferior would be a stretch, to put in mildly.


Unfortunately those who criticise the Linux kernel have had very little exposure to other operating systems let alone computers outside that of the x86 world. I tend to be more of a *BSD/Mac OS X fanboy though.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Comment by diego
by Beta on Sat 11th Jul 2009 09:20 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by diego"
Beta Member since:
2005-07-06

I don't know if you read the benchmarks, but almost every one showed a performance decrease over past kernels.
Performance decreases are called regressions, and are covered in the summary with: ‘the merge window is closed and most of the work going on is to address bugs and other regressions within this massive code-base’

Almost every one
is a bit of a stretch though, don’t you think?

Also, best GPL licensed Kernel/OS ever maybe. To claim everything else in existence is inferior would be a stretch, to put in mildly.

Whereas this is not a stretch, they aren’t many (or any) other kernels that work on as many platforms, on large (88% of supercomputers) and small scale (RJ45 SoCs, ARM wall-plugs) devices, phones, routers, TVs, all with the same codebase. The argument only rests on what you define best to be.

Reply Score: 3

RE: Comment by diego
by AmigaRobbo on Sat 11th Jul 2009 09:45 UTC in reply to "Comment by diego"
AmigaRobbo Member since:
2005-11-15

Linux is the best kernel/OS ever.


That's a bit subjective isn't it?

Reply Score: 1

RE: Comment by diego
by WereCatf on Sat 11th Jul 2009 10:41 UTC in reply to "Comment by diego"
WereCatf Member since:
2006-02-15

Linux is the best kernel/OS ever.

The kernel itself is pretty good, no major issues, stable, works on almost anything ranging from your electronic toothbrush to large-scale supercomputers. But I still don't like how it lacks some stable driver API/ABI. That's one thing that stops certain manufacturers from supporting Linux. And I still find Linux power-management to be flaky.

On the desktop side of things there's also quite a bunch of things that need some attention, but I'll leave the rant to some more proper topic ;)

Reply Score: 2

Any reaction?
by elvstone on Sat 11th Jul 2009 01:10 UTC
elvstone
Member since:
2005-09-08

Any reaction from the kernel devs regarding the regressions that were found? I had a brief look at LKML but couldn't find anything.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Any reaction?
by kev009 on Sat 11th Jul 2009 04:22 UTC in reply to "Any reaction?"
kev009 Member since:
2006-11-30

Generally, Phoronix has about as much credibility as The National Inquirer. They are more interested in hits on their website than whether Linux gets faster or slower.

Real regression tests get posted to the LKML and indicate some level of competence (i.e. a syscall trace or postulate rather than some buffoon running stock benchmarking tools). Luckily, some folks at Intel run good tests from time to time.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Any reaction?
by kaiwai on Sat 11th Jul 2009 05:13 UTC in reply to "RE: Any reaction?"
kaiwai Member since:
2005-07-06

Generally, Phoronix has about as much credibility as The National Inquirer. They are more interested in hits on their website than whether Linux gets faster or slower.


That is rather harsh, I always got the impression that those from Phoronix were just enthusiasts running a website - although one has to be sceptical of any sort of benchmark because one finds that it is never mirrored in reality (in terms of performance outcomes).

Reminds me of the TPC benchmark and what a Sun engineer said about them, "they might be a great benchmark if all you intend to use your hardware for is TPC benchmarks all day".

Real regression tests get posted to the LKML and indicate some level of competence (i.e. a syscall trace or postulate rather than some buffoon running stock benchmarking tools). Luckily, some folks at Intel run good tests from time to time.


True, then there is also the question where things might have changed in the kernel but because the benchmark is badly written, it comes up as a loss of performance.

Reply Score: 3

v too late to report such news
by boulabiar on Sat 11th Jul 2009 06:51 UTC
RE: too late to report such news
by righard on Sat 11th Jul 2009 23:19 UTC in reply to "too late to report such news"
righard Member since:
2007-12-26

And why is that? Is the information worth less now?, Better late then never.

Reply Score: 1

v Linux kernel is a mess
by marcp on Sat 11th Jul 2009 14:06 UTC
RE: Linux kernel is a mess
by siride on Sun 12th Jul 2009 04:21 UTC in reply to "Linux kernel is a mess"
siride Member since:
2006-01-02

Care to explain? It actually seems fairly well-structured for the architecture it uses and the number of platforms and hardware configurations it must support. And even given that, it still performs quite well and is pretty darn stable these days.

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: Linux kernel is a mess
by marcp on Sun 12th Jul 2009 13:48 UTC in reply to "RE: Linux kernel is a mess"
marcp Member since:
2007-11-23

Have you ever came across kernel compilation? it just needs a fix. Tons of different stuff mixed altogether, unmet dependencies, weird connections between several components. What I am thinking of is the logical structure: "Hard disk" with all needed subclasses, like HD controllers, then "Multimedia" divided to "sound devices", "video devices", etc. It's pretty messed up now and I'd like to see it finally working like it should work. I won't even mention the lack of profesionalism and lack of code quality that is typical to linux kernel: it just HAVE to work, no matter HOW, while I - personaly - think, that this "how it works" is the most important thing when it comes to the OS-land. I have really no interrest in throwing a bad word on linux, I just want it to be better - I think we all benefit from it - regardless the camp we're actually in, whether it's GNU, BSD or another one.

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: Linux kernel is a mess
by siride on Sun 12th Jul 2009 14:43 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Linux kernel is a mess"
siride Member since:
2006-01-02

The kernel menu config system is a bit messy, but that's just one *interface* to configuring the kernel and they have been doing a lot of cleanups over time and it's a lot better than it used to be. Still, there are a lot of options and suboptions and things that affect multiple subsystems, so there's not much you can do to organize that any better. Still, I would call that the least serious problem with the Linux kernel.

As far as your accusations regarding lack of professionalism or code quality, I guess you really have never followed kernel development or read the rules the have regarding new code and subsystems, etc. They have some very strict policies about that kind of stuff. And it'll do you well to remember big deals such as reiser4, suspend2 and others that never got merged because of quality and design incompatibility issues. Doesn't sound like lack of code quality to me.

Reply Score: 3

RE[4]: Linux kernel is a mess
by Kebabbert on Sun 12th Jul 2009 16:00 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Linux kernel is a mess"
Kebabbert Member since:
2007-07-27

"Doesn't sound like lack of code quality to me."

Even Linux kernel developer Andrew Morton complains about the declining quality of the Linux kernel. His words:
http://lwn.net/Articles/285088/


Q: Is it your opinion that the quality of the kernel is in decline? Most developers seem to be pretty sanguine about the overall quality problem. Assuming there's a difference of opinion here, where do you think it comes from? How can we resolve it?

A: I used to think it was in decline, and I think that I might think that it still is. I see so many regressions which we never fix.

Reply Score: 3

RE[5]: Linux kernel is a mess
by siride on Sun 12th Jul 2009 16:08 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Linux kernel is a mess"
siride Member since:
2006-01-02

Read the rest of your link: the main problem is really testers not doing their job. They can't fix regressions that they don't have enough information about to fix.

He also speaks highly of the code review process:

"Q: How would you describe the real role of code review in the kernel development process?

A: Well, it finds bugs. It improves the quality of the code. Sometimes it prevents really really bad things from getting into the product. Such as rootholes in the core kernel. I've spotted a decent number of these at review time.

It also increases the number of people who have an understanding of the new code - both the reviewer(s) and those who closely followed the review are now better able to support that code.

Also, I expect that the prospect of receiving a close review will keep the originators on their toes - make them take more care over their work."

Reply Score: 2

RE[6]: Linux kernel is a mess
by Kebabbert on Mon 13th Jul 2009 10:02 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Linux kernel is a mess"
Kebabbert Member since:
2007-07-27

"Read the rest of your link: the main problem is really testers not doing their job. They can't fix regressions that they don't have enough information about to fix."

So what? It doesnt matter why, only the result matters: Linux kernel code is of varying quality as Andrew Morton says.

Reply Score: 2

RE[7]: Linux kernel is a mess
by siride on Mon 13th Jul 2009 12:58 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Linux kernel is a mess"
siride Member since:
2006-01-02

Nowhere in there does he say it's a mess or needs to be thrown away. That's the point of the OP. Yes, maybe some parts need some TLC. Perhaps taking some time to take a look at the dev process to make it a bit tighter would be good too. And maybe it's having a year or two where things aren't quite as good as they were before. I won't deny these facts. I will deny, however, that they mean everything is crap and Linux is terrible and needs to be rebuilt. Can you accept that argument as well?

Reply Score: 2

RE[7]: Linux kernel is a mess
by marcp on Mon 13th Jul 2009 20:30 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Linux kernel is a mess"
marcp Member since:
2007-11-23

I guess that no one here was really talking about the linux kernel being complete and utter crap.
It is quite useful, although it certainly LACKS some features, overall code quality and the general ORDER.
I'd suggest some LINUX KERNEL WORKING GROUP that would be reponsible for maintaining the base of the kernel code. Jesus, they already have an easy task - some *BSD, MacOSX, Windows guys out there are managing THE WHOLE SYSTEM SOURCE, where *system* means "kernel+userland", not only the kernel ...
Increase code quality. That is my postulate.

Reply Score: 2

Linux Kernel is nearly there.
by Amiga64 on Sat 11th Jul 2009 14:36 UTC
Amiga64
Member since:
2009-06-30

Once they achieve binary compatibility with Deluxe Paint AGA and correct the spelling to Kernal it will be finished! Woo hoo!

Reply Score: 4

RE: Linux Kernel is nearly there.
by AmigaRobbo on Sat 11th Jul 2009 20:02 UTC in reply to "Linux Kernel is nearly there."
AmigaRobbo Member since:
2005-11-15

Deluxe Paint AAA would be even better. And it would probably have a better user interface than the GIMP.

Reply Score: 2