Hello! I'm a newbuy in kernel development.
Now I'm just trying to find out what is going in it =).
I noticed this:
>>(BTW. There is a new category called "Will be fixed in 2.6.23")
Is it really important to release 2.6.22 as soon as possible? I think
kernel should be 99% stable. Why not to wait for patches on known
regressions and release more or less stable 2.6.22?
Thanks!
Best wishes, Niam.
> We have patches for "very high non-preempt latency in
> context_struct_compute_av()" and "list_add corruption. prev->next
> should be next (f7d28794), but was f0df8ed4 (prev=f0df8ed4) Kernel Bug
> at lib/list_debug.c:33", but both are too intrusive.
>
> Anyway, those bugs are not regressions.
>
Are you going to release 2.6.22 with this bugs?? But question wasn't
on this subject ...
The question was "why linux kernel release should have some bugs that
would be fixed fixed in future?"
Let's wait and publish kernel w/o known bugs. Let's wait for some
time, let's publish 2.6.22-rc_last, test it for some time(2 weeks for
example), fix bugs if any and after _test_period_of_whole_kernel_ but
not _separate_patches/parts_ of kernel release stable one!
On Fri, 22 Jun 2007 14:39:50 +0300
"Ni@m" <[email protected]> wrote:
> > We have patches for "very high non-preempt latency in
> > context_struct_compute_av()" and "list_add corruption. prev->next
> > should be next (f7d28794), but was f0df8ed4 (prev=f0df8ed4) Kernel Bug
> > at lib/list_debug.c:33", but both are too intrusive.
> >
> > Anyway, those bugs are not regressions.
> The question was "why linux kernel release should have some bugs that
> would be fixed fixed in future?"
Because those bug fixes are intrusive so will potentially cause more
other bugs that will need fixing - so make the kernel a worse not a
better one in the short term.
> Let's wait and publish kernel w/o known bugs.
That would be a bit like waiting for a Debian release and never happen.
Alan
>>That would be a bit like waiting for a Debian release and never happen.
Ok, <offtop>but Debian seems to be stable and sometimes their teem
make releases =).</offtop>
On 22/06/07, Alan Cox <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Fri, 22 Jun 2007 14:39:50 +0300
> "Ni@m" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > We have patches for "very high non-preempt latency in
> > > context_struct_compute_av()" and "list_add corruption. prev->next
> > > should be next (f7d28794), but was f0df8ed4 (prev=f0df8ed4) Kernel Bug
> > > at lib/list_debug.c:33", but both are too intrusive.
> > >
> > > Anyway, those bugs are not regressions.
> > The question was "why linux kernel release should have some bugs that
> > would be fixed fixed in future?"
>
> Because those bug fixes are intrusive so will potentially cause more
> other bugs that will need fixing - so make the kernel a worse not a
> better one in the short term.
>
> > Let's wait and publish kernel w/o known bugs.
>
> That would be a bit like waiting for a Debian release and never happen.
I'm trying to imagine this - Linux 2.6 "Debian style" roadmap:
15-VII-2007 - release of Linux 2.6.22
1-VIII-2007 - freeze
15-II-2009 - release of Linux 2.6.23
1-III-2009 - freeze
1-IX-2010 - release of Linux 2.6.24
:)
>
> Alan
>
Regards,
Michal
--
LOG
http://www.stardust.webpages.pl/log/