From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@transmeta.com>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Cc: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@pobox.com>,
Larry Kessler <kessler@us.ibm.com>,
Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
linux-kernel mailing list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"Andrew V. Savochkin" <saw@saw.sw.com.sg>,
Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>,
Richard J Moore <richardj_moore@uk.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: v2.6 vs v3.0
Date: Sat, 28 Sep 2002 18:31:45 -0700 (PDT) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0209281826050.2198-100000@home.transmeta.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0209280934540.13549-100000@localhost.localdomain>
On Sat, 28 Sep 2002, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> i consider the VM and IO improvements one of the most important things
> that happened in the past 5 years - and it's definitely something that
> users will notice. Finally we have a top-notch VM and IO subsystem (in
> addition to the already world-class networking subsystem) giving
> significant improvements both on the desktop and the server - the jump
> from 2.4 to 2.5 is much larger than from eg. 2.0 to 2.4.
Hey, _if_ people actually are universally happy with the VM in the current
2.5.x tree, I'll happily call the dang thing 5.0 or whatever (just
kidding, but yeah, that would be a good enough reason to bump the major
number).
However, I'll believe that when I see it. Usually people don't complain
during a development kernel, because they think they shouldn't, and then
when it becomes stable (ie when the version number changes) they are
surprised that the behabviour didn't magically improve, and _then_ we get
tons of complaints about how bad the VM is under their load.
Am I hapyy with current 2.5.x? Sure. Are others? Apparently. But does
that mean that we have a top-notch VM and we should bump the major number?
I wish.
The block IO cleanups are important, and that was the major thing _I_
personally wanted from the 2.5.x tree when it was opened. I agree with you
there. But I don't think they are major-number-material.
Anyway, people who are having VM trouble with the current 2.5.x series,
please _complain_, and tell what your workload is. Don't sit silent and
make us think we're good to go.. And if Ingo is right, I'll do the 3.0.x
thing.
Linus
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2002-09-29 1:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 212+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-09-24 1:54 [PATCH-RFC] 4 of 4 - New problem logging macros, SCSI RAID device driver Larry Kessler
2002-09-24 2:22 ` Jeff Garzik
2002-09-26 15:52 ` Alan Cox
2002-09-26 22:55 ` [PATCH-RFC] 4 of 4 - New problem logging macros, SCSI RAIDdevice driver Larry Kessler
2002-09-26 22:58 ` Jeff Garzik
2002-09-26 23:07 ` Linus Torvalds
2002-09-27 2:27 ` Jeff Garzik
2002-09-27 4:45 ` Linus Torvalds
2002-09-28 7:46 ` Ingo Molnar
2002-09-28 9:16 ` jw schultz
2002-09-30 14:05 ` Denis Vlasenko
2002-09-30 10:22 ` Tomas Szepe
2002-09-30 11:10 ` jw schultz
2002-09-30 11:17 ` Adrian Bunk
2002-09-30 19:48 ` Rik van Riel
2002-09-30 20:30 ` Christoph Hellwig
2002-09-28 15:40 ` Kernel version [Was: Re: [PATCH-RFC] 4 of 4 - New problem logging macros, SCSI RAIDdevice driver] Horst von Brand
2002-09-29 1:31 ` Linus Torvalds [this message]
2002-09-29 6:14 ` v2.6 vs v3.0 james
2002-09-29 6:55 ` Andre Hedrick
2002-09-29 12:59 ` Gerhard Mack
2002-09-29 13:46 ` Dr. David Alan Gilbert
2002-09-29 14:06 ` Wakko Warner
2002-09-29 15:42 ` Jens Axboe
2002-09-29 16:21 ` Alan Cox
2002-09-29 16:17 ` Jens Axboe
2002-09-30 0:39 ` Jeff Chua
2002-09-29 16:22 ` Dave Jones
2002-09-29 16:26 ` Jens Axboe
2002-09-29 21:46 ` Matthias Andree
2002-09-30 7:05 ` Michael Clark
2002-09-30 7:22 ` Andrew Morton
2002-09-30 13:08 ` Kevin Corry
2002-09-30 13:05 ` Kevin Corry
2002-09-30 13:49 ` Michael Clark
2002-09-30 14:26 ` Kevin Corry
2002-09-30 13:59 ` Michael Clark
2002-09-30 15:50 ` Kevin Corry
2002-09-29 17:06 ` Jochen Friedrich
2002-09-29 15:18 ` Trever L. Adams
2002-09-29 15:45 ` Jens Axboe
2002-09-29 15:59 ` Trever L. Adams
2002-09-29 16:06 ` Jens Axboe
2002-09-29 16:13 ` Trever L. Adams
2002-09-30 6:54 ` Kai Henningsen
2002-09-30 18:40 ` Bill Davidsen
2002-10-01 12:38 ` Matthias Andree
2002-10-04 19:58 ` Bill Davidsen
2002-09-29 17:42 ` Linus Torvalds
2002-09-29 17:54 ` Rik van Riel
2002-09-29 18:24 ` Alan Cox
2002-09-30 7:56 ` Jens Axboe
2002-09-30 9:53 ` Andre Hedrick
2002-09-30 11:54 ` Jens Axboe
2002-09-30 12:58 ` Alan Cox
2002-09-30 13:05 ` Jens Axboe
2002-10-01 2:17 ` Andre Hedrick
2002-09-30 16:39 ` jbradford
2002-09-30 16:47 ` Pau Aliagas
2002-09-29 7:16 ` jbradford
2002-09-29 8:08 ` Jeff Garzik
2002-09-29 8:17 ` David S. Miller
2002-09-29 9:12 ` Jens Axboe
2002-09-29 11:19 ` Murray J. Root
2002-09-29 15:50 ` Jens Axboe
2002-09-30 7:01 ` Kai Henningsen
2002-09-29 16:04 ` Zwane Mwaikambo
2002-09-29 14:56 ` Alan Cox
2002-09-29 15:38 ` Jens Axboe
2002-09-29 16:30 ` Dave Jones
2002-09-29 16:42 ` Bjoern A. Zeeb
2002-09-29 21:16 ` Russell King
2002-09-29 21:32 ` Alan Cox
2002-09-29 21:49 ` steve
2002-09-29 21:52 ` Matthias Andree
2002-09-30 7:31 ` Tomas Szepe
2002-09-30 15:33 ` Jan Harkes
2002-09-30 18:13 ` Jeff Willis
2002-09-29 17:48 ` Linus Torvalds
2002-09-29 18:13 ` Jaroslav Kysela
2002-09-30 19:32 ` Bill Davidsen
2002-10-01 6:26 ` Jens Axboe
2002-10-01 7:54 ` Mikael Pettersson
2002-10-01 8:27 ` Jens Axboe
2002-10-01 8:44 ` jbradford
2002-10-01 11:31 ` Alan Cox
2002-10-01 11:25 ` Jens Axboe
2002-09-29 15:34 ` Andi Kleen
2002-09-29 17:26 ` Jochen Friedrich
2002-09-29 17:35 ` Jeff Garzik
2002-09-30 0:00 ` Andi Kleen
2002-10-01 19:28 ` IPv6 stability (success story ;) Petr Baudis
2002-09-29 9:15 ` v2.6 vs v3.0 Jens Axboe
2002-09-29 19:53 ` james
2002-09-29 15:26 ` Matthias Andree
2002-09-29 16:24 ` Alan Cox
2002-09-29 22:00 ` Matthias Andree
2002-09-30 19:02 ` Bill Davidsen
2002-09-30 18:37 ` Bill Davidsen
2002-10-03 15:51 ` [OT] 2.6 not 3.0 - (WAS Re: [PATCH-RFC] 4 of 4 - New problem logging macros, SCSI RAIDdevice) jbradford
2002-10-03 15:57 ` Linus Torvalds
2002-10-03 16:16 ` [OT] 2.6 not 3.0 - (WAS Re: [PATCH-RFC] 4 of 4 - New problem jbradford
2002-10-03 22:30 ` Greg KH
2002-10-04 6:33 ` jbradford
2002-10-04 6:37 ` Greg KH
2002-10-04 7:17 ` jbradford
2002-10-04 7:30 ` Greg KH
2002-10-03 16:37 ` [OT] 2.6 not 3.0 - (WAS Re: [PATCH-RFC] 4 of 4 - New problem logging macros, SCSI RAIDdevice) Alan Cox
2002-10-03 16:56 ` Linus Torvalds
2002-10-03 17:40 ` Alan Cox
2002-10-03 19:55 ` jlnance
2002-10-03 16:51 ` Dave Jones
2002-10-03 17:04 ` Alan Cox
2002-10-03 20:43 ` Andrew Morton
2002-10-03 22:05 ` Dave Jones
2002-10-04 3:46 ` Andreas Boman
2002-10-04 7:44 ` jbradford
2002-10-03 19:51 ` Rik van Riel
2002-10-04 22:26 ` [OT] 2.6 not 3.0 - (NUMA) Martin J. Bligh
2002-10-04 23:13 ` Linus Torvalds
2002-10-05 0:21 ` Martin J. Bligh
2002-10-05 0:36 ` Linus Torvalds
2002-10-05 1:25 ` Michael Hohnbaum
2002-10-05 20:30 ` The reason to call it 3.0 is the desktop (was Re: [OT] 2.6 not 3.0 - (NUMA)) Rob Landley
2002-10-06 2:15 ` Andrew Morton
2002-10-06 9:42 ` Russell King
2002-10-06 17:06 ` Alan Cox
2002-10-06 13:44 ` Oliver Neukum
2002-10-06 15:19 ` Martin J. Bligh
2002-10-06 15:14 ` Oliver Neukum
2002-10-07 8:08 ` Helge Hafting
2002-10-07 9:18 ` Oliver Neukum
2002-10-07 14:11 ` Jan Hudec
2002-10-07 15:01 ` Jesse Pollard
2002-10-07 15:34 ` Jan Hudec
2002-10-08 3:12 ` [OT] " Scott Mcdermott
2002-10-10 23:49 ` Mike Fedyk
2002-10-07 15:15 ` Martin J. Bligh
2002-10-08 13:49 ` Helge Hafting
2002-10-07 17:43 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-10-07 18:31 ` Andrew Morton
2002-10-07 18:51 ` Linus Torvalds
2002-10-07 20:14 ` Alan Cox
2002-10-07 20:31 ` The reason to call it 3.0 is the desktop (was Re: [OT] 2.6 not3.0 " Andrew Morton
2002-10-07 20:46 ` Linus Torvalds
2002-10-07 20:44 ` The reason to call it 3.0 is the desktop (was Re: [OT] 2.6 not 3.0 " Linus Torvalds
2002-10-07 21:16 ` The reason to call it 3.0 is the desktop (was Re: [OT] 2.6 not3.0 " Andrew Morton
2002-10-07 23:47 ` jw schultz
2002-10-11 0:02 ` Mike Fedyk
2002-10-07 18:58 ` The reason to call it 3.0 is the desktop (was Re: [OT] 2.6 not 3.0 " Chris Friesen
2002-10-07 19:21 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-10-07 19:35 ` Linus Torvalds
2002-10-08 0:39 ` Theodore Ts'o
2002-10-08 2:59 ` Andrew Morton
2002-10-08 16:15 ` Theodore Ts'o
2002-10-08 19:39 ` Andrew Morton
2002-10-08 17:06 ` Rob Landley
2002-10-07 19:36 ` Andrew Morton
2002-10-08 2:36 ` Simon Kirby
2002-10-08 2:47 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-10-08 2:50 ` Andrew Morton
2002-10-08 2:54 ` Simon Kirby
2002-10-08 3:00 ` Andrew Morton
2002-10-08 16:17 ` Theodore Ts'o
2002-10-08 12:49 ` jlnance
2002-10-08 17:09 ` Andrew Morton
2002-10-10 20:53 ` Thomas Zimmerman
2002-10-08 13:54 ` Helge Hafting
2002-10-08 15:31 ` Andreas Dilger
2002-10-07 19:05 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-10-07 19:24 ` Linus Torvalds
2002-10-07 20:02 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-10-07 20:14 ` Andrew Morton
2002-10-07 20:22 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-10-07 20:28 ` Linus Torvalds
2002-10-07 21:16 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-10-07 21:55 ` Linus Torvalds
2002-10-07 22:02 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-10-07 22:12 ` Andrew Morton
2002-10-08 8:49 ` Padraig Brady
2002-10-07 22:14 ` Charles Cazabon
2002-10-30 18:26 ` Lee Leahu
2002-10-06 6:33 ` Martin J. Bligh
2002-10-07 5:28 ` John Alvord
2002-10-07 8:39 ` The reason to call it 3.0 is the desktop (was Re: [OT] 2.6 n Giuliano Pochini
2002-10-07 13:56 ` The reason to call it 3.0 is the desktop (was Re: [OT] 2.6 not 3.0 - (NUMA)) Jesse Pollard
2002-10-07 14:03 ` Rob Landley
2002-10-08 22:14 ` Jesse Pollard
2002-10-08 19:11 ` Rob Landley
2002-10-09 8:17 ` Alexander Kellett
2002-10-07 18:22 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-10-08 8:19 ` Jan Hudec
2002-10-11 23:53 ` Hans Reiser
2002-10-11 20:26 ` Rob Landley
2002-10-12 4:14 ` Nick LeRoy
2002-10-13 17:27 ` Rob Landley
2002-10-12 10:03 ` Hans Reiser
2002-10-13 17:32 ` Rob Landley
2002-10-13 23:51 ` Hans Reiser
2002-10-14 16:33 ` Rob Landley
2002-10-14 7:10 ` Nikita Danilov
2002-10-21 15:36 ` [OT] Please don't call it 3.0!! (was Re: The reason to call it 3.0 is the desktop (was Re: [OT] 2.6 not 3.0 - (NUMA))) Calin A. Culianu
2002-10-21 16:20 ` Wakko Warner
2002-10-12 11:42 ` The reason to call it 3.0 is the desktop (was Re: [OT] 2.6 not 3.0 - (NUMA)) Matthias Andree
2002-10-12 14:56 ` Hugh Dickins
2002-09-27 11:32 ` [PATCH-RFC] 4 of 4 - New problem logging macros, SCSI RAIDdevice driver Alan Cox
[not found] <fa.e52m04v.plkfqo@ifi.uio.no>
[not found] ` <fa.jgmettv.1hku79s@ifi.uio.no>
2002-09-30 0:16 ` v2.6 vs v3.0 walt
2002-09-30 18:20 John L. Males
[not found] ` <200209302059.g8UKxQEh007769@darkstar.example.net>
2002-09-30 22:02 ` John L. Males
2002-10-01 2:02 ` Nick Piggin
2002-10-01 11:20 ` Christoph Hellwig
2002-10-02 7:55 Mikael Pettersson
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=Pine.LNX.4.44.0209281826050.2198-100000@home.transmeta.com \
--to=torvalds@transmeta.com \
--cc=alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk \
--cc=jgarzik@pobox.com \
--cc=kessler@us.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=richardj_moore@uk.ibm.com \
--cc=rusty@rustcorp.com.au \
--cc=saw@saw.sw.com.sg \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).