any chance of 2.6.0-test*?

any chance of 2.6.0-test*?

Post by William Lee Irwin II » Sat, 11 Jan 2003 18:54:41



Say, I've been having _smashing_ success with 2.5.x on the desktop and
on big fat highmem ump*-way SMP (NUMA even!) boxen, and I was
wondering if you were considering 2.6.0-test* anytime soon.

I'd love to get this stuff out for users to hammer on ASAP, and things
are looking really good AFAICT.

Any specific concerns/issues/wishlist items you want taken care of
before doing it or is it a "generalized comfort level" kind of thing?
Let me know, I'd be much obliged for specific directions to move in.

Thanks,
Bill
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in

More majordomo info at  http://www.veryComputer.com/
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.veryComputer.com/

 
 
 

any chance of 2.6.0-test*?

Post by Dave Jone » Sat, 11 Jan 2003 18:54:55



 > Say, I've been having _smashing_ success with 2.5.x on the desktop and
 > on big fat highmem ump*-way SMP (NUMA even!) boxen, and I was
 > wondering if you were considering 2.6.0-test* anytime soon.

There's still a boatload of drivers that don't compile,
a metric shitload of bits that never came over from 2.4 after
I stopped doing it circa 2.4.18, a lot of little 'trivial'
patches that got left by the wayside, and a load of 'strange' bits
that still need nailing down (personally, I have two boxes
that won't boot a 2.5 kernel currently (One was pnpbios related,
other needs more investigation), and another that falls on its
face after 10 minutes idle uptime. My p4-ht desktop box is the only one
that runs 2.5 without any problems.

I think we're a way off from a '2.6-test' phase personally,
but instigating a harder 'code freeze' would probably be a
good thing to do[1]

                Dave

[1] Exemption granted for the bits not yet brought forward
    of course.

--
| Dave Jones.        http://www.veryComputer.com/
| SuSE Labs
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in

More majordomo info at  http://www.veryComputer.com/
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.veryComputer.com/

 
 
 

any chance of 2.6.0-test*?

Post by Alan Co » Sat, 11 Jan 2003 18:55:05



Quote:> Any specific concerns/issues/wishlist items you want taken care of
> before doing it or is it a "generalized comfort level" kind of thing?
> Let me know, I'd be much obliged for specific directions to move in.

IDE is all broken still and will take at least another three months to
fix - before we get to 'improve'. The entire tty layer locking is terminally
broken and nobody has even started fixing it. Just try a mass of parallel
tty/pty activity . It was problematic before, pre-empt has taken it  to dead,
defunct and buried.

Most of the drivers still don't build either.

I think its important that we get to the stage that we can actually say

- It compiles (as close to all the mainstream bits of it as possible)
- The stuff that is destined for the bitbucket is marked in Config and people
  agree it should go
- It works (certainly the common stuff)
- Its statistically unlikely to eat your computer
- It passes Cerberus uniprocessor and smp with/without pre-empt

Otherwise everyone wil rapidly decide that ".0-pre" means ".0 as in Windows"
at which point you've just destroyed your testing base.

Given all the new stuff should be in, I'd like to see a Linus the meanie
round of updating for a while which is simply about getting all the 2.4 fixes
and the 2.5 driver compile bugs nailed, and if it doesn't fix a compile bug
or a logic bug it doesn't go in.

No more "ISAPnP TNG" and module rewrites please

Alan

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in

More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

 
 
 

any chance of 2.6.0-test*?

Post by Shawn Star » Sat, 11 Jan 2003 18:55:11


There will be a new kernel tree that will fit this purpose soon called -xlk
(eXtendable or Extended Linux Kernel). The hope to make it an 'official' like
-ac, -mm tree for stuffing experimental stuff into a post 2.6 (or just before
2.6 goes live) kernel. I will need help in getting this to become a reality
in the coming months to 2.6.

The purpose of the tree is to get experimental code ready for the 2.7 (2.9?)
tree. We want code that will add new drivers / devices and general
improvements to the kernel. The goal is once these are stabilized they can be
submitted to Linus and friends for blessings and inclusion into 2.7 dev
*early* so we won't have a mad rush for features before the next feature
freeze.

Quote:>Subject:  any chance of 2.6.0-test*?

From:     William Lee Irwin III <wli () holomorphy ! com>

Quote:>Date:     2003-01-10 16:10:12
>Say, I've been having _smashing_ success with 2.5.x on the desktop and
>on big fat highmem ump*-way SMP (NUMA even!) boxen, and I was
>wondering if you were considering 2.6.0-test* anytime soon.
>I'd love to get this stuff out for users to hammer on ASAP, and things
>are looking really good AFAICT.
>Any specific concerns/issues/wishlist items you want taken care of
>before doing it or is it a "generalized comfort level" kind of thing?
>Let me know, I'd be much obliged for specific directions to move in.
>Thanks,
>Bill

--
Shawn Starr
UNIX Systems Administrator, Operations
Datawire Communication Networks Inc.
10 Carlson Court, Suite 300
Toronto, ON, M9W 6L2
T: 416-213-2001 ext 179  F: 416-213-2008

"The power to Transact" - http://www.veryComputer.com/

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in

More majordomo info at  http://www.veryComputer.com/
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.veryComputer.com/

 
 
 

any chance of 2.6.0-test*?

Post by Jeff Garzi » Sat, 11 Jan 2003 18:55:12



> No more "ISAPnP TNG" and module rewrites please

Highlighted and seconded...
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in

More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/
 
 
 

any chance of 2.6.0-test*?

Post by Zwane Mwaikamb » Sat, 11 Jan 2003 18:55:13



> There's still a boatload of drivers that don't compile,
> a metric shitload of bits that never came over from 2.4 after
> I stopped doing it circa 2.4.18, a lot of little 'trivial'
> patches that got left by the wayside, and a load of 'strange' bits
> that still need nailing down (personally, I have two boxes
> that won't boot a 2.5 kernel currently (One was pnpbios related,

I had a problem with PCI init, pnpbios ordering at some point, but i
haven't tried a kernel with pnpbios in a while.

Quote:> other needs more investigation), and another that falls on its
> face after 10 minutes idle uptime. My p4-ht desktop box is the only one
> that runs 2.5 without any problems.

Thats interesting, i have a laptop experiencing the same symptoms, i'll be
looking at it over the weekend.

        Zwane
--
function.linuxpower.ca
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in

More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

 
 
 

any chance of 2.6.0-test*?

Post by Dave Jone » Sat, 11 Jan 2003 19:10:14


 > There will be a new kernel tree that will fit this purpose soon called -xlk
 > (eXtendable or Extended Linux Kernel). The hope to make it an 'official' like
 > -ac, -mm tree for stuffing experimental stuff into a post 2.6 (or just before
 > 2.6 goes live) kernel. I will need help in getting this to become a reality
 > in the coming months to 2.6.

The effort is really much better spent trying to get to 2.6 first before
worrying about things like 2.7.  I hope 2.6 doesn't turn into the
"heres my 2.4+preempt+rmap patchset" monster that we saw six months ago.

 > We want code that will add new drivers / devices and general
 > improvements to the kernel.

non-core changes (ie, new drivers) still get added during code freeze,
and during 2.6.x, there's no need for a specific tree just for this.
Adding a new driver doesn't (or at least shouldn't) impact any existing
users if done right.

 > The goal is once these are stabilized they can be
 > submitted to Linus and friends for blessings and inclusion into 2.7 dev
 > *early* so we won't have a mad rush for features before the next feature
 > freeze.

Nice try. It'll still happen regardless. Bombing Linus with ten zillion
patches when he opens up 2.7.x with "has been tested in 2.6-xyz" isn't
the way to do it. Everything has to happen incrementally, or you end
up with a mess.

                Dave

--
| Dave Jones.        http://www.codemonkey.org.uk
| SuSE Labs
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in

More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

 
 
 

any chance of 2.6.0-test*?

Post by Dave Jone » Sat, 11 Jan 2003 19:20:09


 > Most of the drivers still don't build either.

or still lack 2.4 fixes.

 > - The stuff that is destined for the bitbucket is marked in Config and people
 >   agree it should go

What's happening with the OSS drivers ?
I'm still carrying a few hundred KB of changes from 2.4 for those.
I'm not going to spent a day splitting them up, commenting them and pushing
to Linus if we're going to be dropping various drivers.

 > - It passes Cerberus uniprocessor and smp with/without pre-empt

I think this should wait until at least some more of the 2.4 changes
come forward. Most of those are security issues and the likes, but there
are a few driver corner cases too.

 > Otherwise everyone wil rapidly decide that ".0-pre" means ".0 as in Windows"
 > at which point you've just destroyed your testing base.

agreed.

 > Given all the new stuff should be in, I'd like to see a Linus the meanie
 > round of updating for a while which is simply about getting all the 2.4 fixes
 > and the 2.5 driver compile bugs nailed, and if it doesn't fix a compile bug
 > or a logic bug it doesn't go in.

Seconded.

 > No more "ISAPnP TNG" and module rewrites please

Absolutly. Lets try and get 2.6 out the door _this_ year.

                Dave

--
| Dave Jones.        http://www.codemonkey.org.uk
| SuSE Labs
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in

More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

 
 
 

any chance of 2.6.0-test*?

Post by Dave Jone » Sat, 11 Jan 2003 19:20:09


 > > other needs more investigation), and another that falls on its
 > > face after 10 minutes idle uptime. My p4-ht desktop box is the only one
 > > that runs 2.5 without any problems.
 >
 > Thats interesting, i have a laptop experiencing the same symptoms, i'll be
 > looking at it over the weekend.

This is exactly the sort of thing I meant. There are still problems out
there which a lot of people haven't reported, yet when they see someone
else with that problem, suddenly the 'me too's come in.

I'm hoping the bugzilla will help out for corelating these as it starts to get
used more.

                Dave

--
| Dave Jones.        http://www.codemonkey.org.uk
| SuSE Labs
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in

More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

 
 
 

any chance of 2.6.0-test*?

Post by Jeff Garzi » Sat, 11 Jan 2003 19:30:17




> What's happening with the OSS drivers ?
> I'm still carrying a few hundred KB of changes from 2.4 for those.
> I'm not going to spent a day splitting them up, commenting them and pushing
> to Linus if we're going to be dropping various drivers.

I've been updating the via audio every now and again.

If sound/oss is staying for 2.6.0, we might as well merge the 2.4.x
changes.

        Jeff

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in

More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

 
 
 

any chance of 2.6.0-test*?

Post by Alan Co » Sat, 11 Jan 2003 19:40:07



> What's happening with the OSS drivers ?
> I'm still carrying a few hundred KB of changes from 2.4 for those.
> I'm not going to spent a day splitting them up, commenting them and pushing
> to Linus if we're going to be dropping various drivers.

I'd hope they would go away but it seems that will be post 2.6. The
drivers do seem to mostly work in 2.5.x. I'm meaning the stuff that
doesn't compile and nobody gives a damn about.

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in

More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

 
 
 

any chance of 2.6.0-test*?

Post by Linus Torvald » Sat, 11 Jan 2003 19:40:09



> What's happening with the OSS drivers ?
> I'm still carrying a few hundred KB of changes from 2.4 for those.
> I'm not going to spent a day splitting them up, commenting them and pushing
> to Linus if we're going to be dropping various drivers.

I consider them to be old drivers, the same way "hd.c" was. Not
necessarily useful for most people, but neither was hd.c. And it was
around for a _long_ time (heh. I needed to check. The config option is
still there ;)

So I don't see a huge reason to remove them from the sources, but we might
well make them harder to select by mistake, for example. Right now the
config help files aren't exactly helpful, and the OSS choice is before the
ALSA one, which looks wrong.

They should probably be marked deprecated, and if they don't get a lot of
maintenance, that's fine.

                Linus

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in

More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

 
 
 

any chance of 2.6.0-test*?

Post by Jochen Friedric » Sat, 11 Jan 2003 19:50:04




> > Any specific concerns/issues/wishlist items you want taken care of
> > before doing it or is it a "generalized comfort level" kind of thing?
> > Let me know, I'd be much obliged for specific directions to move in.

> IDE is all broken still and will take at least another three months to
> fix - before we get to 'improve'.

As is the whole frame buffer mess. USB slowly seems to return to a working
state. ISDN seems to be a total mess, as well.

Quote:> No more "ISAPnP TNG" and module rewrites please

Full ACK. There are still archs without working module code, right now
(parisc and mips come to my mind).

--jochen

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in

More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

 
 
 

any chance of 2.6.0-test*?

Post by Linus Torvald » Sat, 11 Jan 2003 19:50:11



> Full ACK. There are still archs without working module code, right now
> (parisc and mips come to my mind).

Note that other architectures have never been an issue for releasing new
kernels, and that is _particularly_ true of architectures like parisc and
mips that haven't even _tried_ to track development kernels. In fact, mips
"anti-maintenance" has often actively discouraged people from even
bothering to update mips code when adding new features.

                Linus

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in

More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

 
 
 

any chance of 2.6.0-test*?

Post by J.A. Magallo » Sat, 11 Jan 2003 21:00:14




> > What's happening with the OSS drivers ?
> > I'm still carrying a few hundred KB of changes from 2.4 for those.
> > I'm not going to spent a day splitting them up, commenting them and pushing
> > to Linus if we're going to be dropping various drivers.

> I consider them to be old drivers, the same way "hd.c" was. Not
> necessarily useful for most people, but neither was hd.c. And it was
> around for a _long_ time (heh. I needed to check. The config option is
> still there ;)

> So I don't see a huge reason to remove them from the sources, but we might
> well make them harder to select by mistake, for example. Right now the
> config help files aren't exactly helpful, and the OSS choice is before the
> ALSA one, which looks wrong.

> They should probably be marked deprecated, and if they don't get a lot of
> maintenance, that's fine.

>            Linus

As there is a CONFIG_EXPERIMENTAL, how about a CONFIG_DEPRECATED for the
opposite edge ?

--

werewolf.able.es                         \           It's better when it's free
Mandrake Linux release 9.1 (Cooker) for i586
Linux 2.4.21-pre2-jam2 (gcc 3.2.1 (Mandrake Linux 9.1 3.2.1-2mdk))
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in

More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

 
 
 

1. Fixing the tty layer was Re: any chance of 2.6.0-test*?

[forgot to cc linux-kernel in the first try, sorry if you see it twice]

it has to be fixed for 2.6, no argument.

I took a look at it. I think the easiest strategy would be:

- Make sure all the process context code holds BKL
(most of it does, but not all - sometimes it is buggy like in
disassociate_tty)
I have some patches for that for tty_io.c at least

The local_irq_save in there are buggy, they need to take
a lock.

- Audit the data structures that are touched by interrupts
and add spinlocks.
At least for n_tty.c probably just tty->read_lock needs to be
extended.
Perhaps some can be just "fixed" by ignoring latency and pushing
softirq functions into keventd
(modern CPUs should be fast enough for that)

- Possibly disable module unloading for ldiscs (seems to be rather broken,
although Rusty's new unload algorithm may avoid the worst - not completely
sure)

Probably all doable with some concentrated effort.

Anyone interested in helping ?

-Andi
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in

More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

2. Latest sources or SRPMS

3. test test test test test test test

4. RH 6 Hangs on install - SCSI problems?

5. Last chance to try out 'Networking Concepts' test!

6. Support for FAT32 ?

7. test test test test

8. COLA FAQ 3 of 7 24-Aug-2002

9. testing ... testing ... testing ...

10. test test test

11. TEST TEST TEST; don't read

12. Testing, testing, testing