Linux 2.6.0

Linux 2.6.0

[Linus Torvalds]

				"The beaver is out of detox"
						- Anon

This should not be a big surprise to anybody on the list any more, since
we've been building up to it for a long time now, and for the last few
weeks I haven't accepted any patches except for what amounts to fairly
obvious one-liners.

Anyway, 2.6.0 is out there now, and the patch from -test11 is a swelte 
11kB in size. It's not the totally empty patch I was hoping for, but 
judging by the bugs I worked on personally, things are looking pretty 
good. 

To give you an example, one of the nastier bugs that we chased for the 
last five weeks was a bug that could only be reproduced reliably on a 
16- or 32-way system, and only when the system had flaky disks. Putting in 
known-good disks made the problem disappear. Similarly, compiling the 
kernel with another compiler made the problem disappear.

It turned out to be a really subtle bug wrt SMP ordering and stack
allocation, and lots of thanks to Ram Pai for gathering all the
information that eventually led to it being fixed. The fix was a one-liner
and a big comment - but my point is that the quality of bugs has been
pretty high lately, and we feel that we're in pretty good shape.

Andrew has written up some caveats and pointers to information about 2.4.x
vs 2.6.x changes, and I'll let him post that. Some known issues were not
considered to be release-critical and a number of them have pending fixes
in the -mm queue. Generally they just didn't have the kind of verification
yet where I was willing to take them in order to make sure a fair 2.6.0
release.

NOTE! I'll continue to keep track of the 2.6 BK tree until we're closer to
the time when we literally split it for 2.7.x, because both Andrew and I
are pretty comfortable with our respective toolchains. But Andrew is the
stable tree maintainer, so everything should be approved by him at this
point. Think of the -mm tree as the staging area, and mine as a release
tree. We'll work together, but Andrew is boss.

(BK merging will have to go through some approval format, we'll see how
that works out exactly).

		Linus

---

Summary of changes from v2.6.0-test11 to v2.6.0
============================================

Alan Stern:
  o USB: fix bug not setting device state following usb_device_reset()

Andrey Borzenkov:
  o USB: prevent catch-all USB aliases in modules.alias

Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo:
  o [IPV6]: Fix TCP socket leak

David Brownell:
  o USB: fix remove device after set_configuration

David S. Miller:
  o [NETFILTER]: In conntrack, do not fragment TSO packets by accident
  o [PKT_SCHED]: Do not dereference the special pointer value 'HTB_DIRECT'

Greg Kroah-Hartman:
  o USB: register usb-serial ports in the proper place in sysfs
  o USB: fix race with hub devices disconnecting while stuff is still
    happening to them
  o USB: fix bug for multiple opens on ttyUSB devices
  o kobject: fix bug where a parent could be deleted before a child
    device

Harald Welte:
  o [NETFILTER]: Sanitize ip_ct_tcp_timeout_close_wait value, from 2.4.x

Herbert Xu:
  o USB: Fix connect/disconnect race

Hideaki Yoshifuji:
  o [IPV6]: Fix ipv4 mapped address calculation in udpv6_sendmsg()

Hirofumi Ogawa:
  o Missing initialization of /proc/net/tcp seq_file

Ingo Molnar:
  o Fix lost wakeups problem
  o Fix /proc access to dead thread group list oops

James McMechan:
  o tmpfs oops fix

Jean Delvare:
  o I2C: fix i2c_smbus_write_byte() for i2c-nforce2

Jeff Garzik:
  o fix use-after-free in libata
  o fix oops on unload in pcnet32
  o remove manual driver poisoning of net_device
  o wireless airo oops fix

Jens Axboe:
  o fix broken x86_64 rdtscll
  o scsi_ioctl memcpy'ing user address
  o no bio unmap on cdb copy failure
  o Fix IDE bus reset and DMA disable when reading blank DVD-R
  o CDROM_SEND_PACKET bug

Jes Sorensen:
  o qla1280 crash fix in error handling

Julian Anastasov:
  o [BRIDGE]: Provide correct TOS value to IPv4 routing

Linus Torvalds:
  o Fix x86 kernel page fault error codes
  o Fix ide-scsi.c uninitialized variable
  o Fix the PROT_EXEC breakage on anonymous mmap
  o Fix subtle bug in "finish_wait()", which can cause kernel stack
    corruption on SMP because of another CPU still accessing a
    waitqueue even after it was de-allocated.
  o More subtle SMP bugs in prepare_to_wait()/finish_wait()
  o Fix thread group leader zombie leak

Martin Devera:
  o [PKT_SCHED]: In HTB, filters must be destroyed before the classes

Matthew Dharm:
  o USB storage: fix for jumpshot and datafab devices

Neil Brown:
  o Fix possible bio corruption with RAID5

Oliver Neukum:
  o USB: fix sleping in interrupt bug in auerswald driver
  o USB: fix race with signal delivery in usbfs

Pavlin Radoslavov:
  o [RTNETLINK]: Add RTPROT_XORP

René Scharfe:
  o HPFS: missing lock_kernel() in hpfs_readdir()

Tom Rini:
  o USB: mark the scanner driver as obsolete

Ulrich Drepper:
  o Fix 'noexec' behaviour

Re: Linux 2.6.0

[Jonathan Brown]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 15 bytes --]

Whoo Hoo!



[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: Linux 2.6.0

[Gerardo Exequiel Pozzi]

On Wed, 17 Dec 2003 20:14:06 -0800 (PST), Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
>				"The beaver is out of detox"
>						- Anon

YEEEAAAHH!!!! 


pandereta-linux-gnu !! rulz! :)


-- 
Gerardo Exequiel Pozzi ( djgera )
http://www.vmlinuz.com.ar http://www.djgera.com.ar
KeyID: 0x1B8C330D
Key fingerprint = 0CAA D5D4 CD85 4434 A219  76ED 39AB 221B 1B8C 330D

Re: Linux 2.6.0

[Joshua Kwan]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 552 bytes --]

On Wed, Dec 17, 2003 at 08:14:06PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> Andrew has written up some caveats and pointers to information about 2.4.x
> vs 2.6.x changes, and I'll let him post that. Some known issues were not
> considered to be release-critical and a number of them have pending fixes
> in the -mm queue. Generally they just didn't have the kind of verification
> yet where I was willing to take them in order to make sure a fair 2.6.0
> release.

Should we be expecting a 2.6.0-mm1 then?

Great work, by the way!

-- 
Joshua Kwan

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 827 bytes --]

Re: Linux 2.6.0

[Norberto Bensa]

[-- Attachment #1: signed data --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 382 bytes --]

Linus Torvalds wrote:
> 				"The beaver is out of detox"
> 						- Anon

You won't believe this, but I just booted with -test11 ... Oh well, recompile 
again... There goes my uptime once more :-)

Thank you Linus!

Regards,
Norberto

-- 
Linux 2.6.0-test11 Pentium III (Coppermine) GenuineIntel GNU/Linux
 02:05:42 up 36 min,  1 user,  load average: 0.04, 0.21, 0.24

[-- Attachment #2: signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: Linux 2.6.0

[Andrew Morton]

Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org> wrote:
>
> Andrew has written up some caveats and pointers to information about 2.4.x
>  vs 2.6.x changes, and I'll let him post that. Some known issues were not
>  considered to be release-critical and a number of them have pending fixes
>  in the -mm queue. Generally they just didn't have the kind of verification
>  yet where I was willing to take them in order to make sure a fair 2.6.0
>  release.

It's actually rather short because I started late.  See below.

There are also the "must-fix" and "should-fix" lists of items which we have
identified as still on the 2.6 todo list.  These are at

ftp://ftp.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/akpm/must-fix/must-fix-7.txt and
ftp://ftp.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/akpm/must-fix/should-fix-7.txt




- The 2.6.0 kernel has undergone several weeks of stabilization and we
  expect it to run well on server-class machines.

  Desktops and laptops may have more trouble at this time because of the
  much wider range of hardware and because of as-yet unimplemented fixes for
  the hardware and BIOS bugs from which these machines tend to suffer.

  During the 2.6.0 stabilization period a significant number of less
  serious fixes have accumulated in various auxiliary kernel trees and these
  shall be merged into the 2.6 stream after the 2.6.0 release.  Many of these
  fixes appear in Andrew Morton's "-mm" tree, at

	ftp://ftp.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/akpm/patches/2.6/

- Please report any problems to the appropriate mailing list.  If you do
  not know which list to use, send the report to linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
  and it should reach the right person.  Some active subsystem mailing lists
  are:

	linux1394-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
	linux-xfs@oss.sgi.com
	linux-acpi@intel.com
	linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org
	ext2-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
	linux-usb-users@lists.sourceforge.net

  Alternatively, kernel bug reports may be entered into the kernel bug
  tracking system at http://bugme.osdl.org/

- There are significant changes in the module subsystem, the LVM (Device
  Mapper) and RAID subsystems.  Details about these and many other kernel
  changes are presented in David Jones's kernel upgrade document at

	http://www.linux.org.uk/~davej/docs/post-halloween-2.6.txt

  Users who are testing 2.6 kernels for the first time should consult this
  document.

- The ATA RAID drivers (eg the HighPoint RAID driver) have not been ported
  to the new BIO code and are not available under the 2.6 kernel at this
  time.

- cryptoloop doesn't work on highmem machines.  Fixes exist in -mm and are
  queued for 2.6.1.

- There are known performance problems with the default disk I/O scheduler
  which show up when the workload is performing small, random reads and
  writes (ie: database loads).  Largely fixed in -mm.

  In general, the "deadline" I/O scheduler is, and shall remain somewhat
  faster than the default "anticipatory" I/O scheduler with these sorts of
  workloads.  Database admins should consider adding the "elevator=deadline"
  kernel boot parameter.

- There are performance problems due to misbehaviour in the readahead code
  which also impact database-style workloads.  Fixed in -mm, queued for
  2.6.1.

- There are a larger number of as-yet unmerged frame buffer driver fixes.

Re: Linux 2.6.0

[Jeff Garzik]

Andrew Morton wrote:
> Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org> wrote:
> 
>>Andrew has written up some caveats and pointers to information about 2.4.x
>> vs 2.6.x changes, and I'll let him post that. Some known issues were not
>> considered to be release-critical and a number of them have pending fixes
>> in the -mm queue. Generally they just didn't have the kind of verification
>> yet where I was willing to take them in order to make sure a fair 2.6.0
>> release.
> 
> 
> It's actually rather short because I started late.  See below.
> 
> There are also the "must-fix" and "should-fix" lists of items which we have
> identified as still on the 2.6 todo list.  These are at
> 
> ftp://ftp.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/akpm/must-fix/must-fix-7.txt and
> ftp://ftp.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/akpm/must-fix/should-fix-7.txt

Cheers, thanks, and a public salud, boss ;-)


> - Please report any problems to the appropriate mailing list.  If you do
>   not know which list to use, send the report to linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
>   and it should reach the right person.  Some active subsystem mailing lists
>   are:
> 
> 	linux1394-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> 	linux-xfs@oss.sgi.com
> 	linux-acpi@intel.com
> 	linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org
> 	ext2-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> 	linux-usb-users@lists.sourceforge.net

For networking, I request people mail

	netdev@oss.sgi.com


>   Alternatively, kernel bug reports may be entered into the kernel bug
>   tracking system at http://bugme.osdl.org/

I prefer the organization-agnostic

	http://bugzilla.kernel.org/

;-)

FWIW it's more a defense against "osdl.org" domain name changes, than 
anything else...  kernel.org will be around decades from now, IMO.


> - The ATA RAID drivers (eg the HighPoint RAID driver) have not been ported
>   to the new BIO code and are not available under the 2.6 kernel at this
>   time.

These will appear as Device Mapper modules, Arjan has posted.  I'm 
planning on digging my hands into some of that too, now that Promise has 
opened their softRAID spec a bit.

from the #3 networking beaver,

	Jeff

Re: Linux 2.6.0

[Trond Myklebust]

Congratulations Linus and Andrew...

Will you be posting a plan for how you want the 2.6.x series to
proceed? I gather I'm not alone in having a load of patches that I'd
like to send you ASAP...

Here's a brief commentary on the NFS client related sections in your 2
todo lists, as well as on outstanding client issues:

Must fix:
  - The mmap-versus-truncate NFS problem appears to be a lot more
    difficult to reproduce these days. I need a call for testing to
    verify that the problem still exists.
  - I'm mystified by Andi's comments about RPC having lots of
    uninterruptible waits. It sounds to me as if he is confusing the
    "soft" and "intr" options. The two are very distinct...

Should fix:
  - The VFS support for atomic open() has already been merged by Linus
    (as well as the NFSv2/v3 support). I still have a couple of
    trivial bugfixes for the VFS case (one place where we used O_READ
    instead of FMODE_READ, and one place where the "intent" is not
    filled in at all). NFSv4 support needs for atomic open to be
    merged in (this will fix several NFSv4 file creation races).


Not listed in either:
  - There are a few lockd fixes that need to be forward-ported from
    2.4.x.

  - A *lot* of progress has been made on the NFSv4 client. I would
    very much like to merge this into 2.6.x ASAP, since it concerns
    rather critical subjects such as adding support for locking, and
    reboot recovery (as well as lots of stability fixes). What are
    your feelings on a timeframe for this sort of thing?

  - The RPCSEC_GSS support for NFSv2/v3 was merged in before it had
    been thoroughly tested and reviewed. It contains a couple of
    serious bugs that need to be ironed out.

If you want info beyond this mail, then my current set of NFS client
patches may be found on

   http://www.fys.uio.no/~trondmy/src/Linux-2.6.x/2.6.0-test11

The file HEADER.html contains a list of patches and a brief
description of what each patch does. That should give an idea of how
much is currently outstanding (I still expect the list to continue
growing - I'm still working on several NFSv4 subtopics).

Cheers,
  Trond

Re: Linux 2.6.0

[Andrew Morton]

Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@fys.uio.no> wrote:
>
> 
> Congratulations Linus and Andrew...

Let's first see how embarrassing the next week proves to be...

> Will you be posting a plan for how you want the 2.6.x series to
> proceed? I gather I'm not alone in having a load of patches that I'd
> like to send you ASAP...

I believe that the processes we've all been using for the past year have
worked well (invitation here for people to disagree).  So any changes we
make to that process shouldn't be arbitrary.

I expect that until 2.7.0 forks, Linus and I shall continue to work 2.6.x
in much the same manner - that's what I'd prefer, anyway.

Obviously, the threshold for merging things into 2.6 becomes higher, and
large changes will be rejected pending more review and testing.  I shall
continue to run an alternate tree for the provision of that testing
service.

Generally, we should expect that there will be large changes across the 2.6
lifetime - it is unrealistic to believe otherwise.  We just need to find
the processes to absorb those changes (and feed them into or from 2.7.x)
without breaking stuff.  We've done that fairly well across 2.5 I think.


We should sit tight for the next week or so, in case we need to rush out a
2.6.1 for brown-bag bugs.  After that I need to shrink the -mm patchset
rather a lot.

> Here's a brief commentary on the NFS client related sections in your 2
> todo lists, as well as on outstanding client issues:

Nick has been maintaining these lists lately - hopefully he can send me an
update for NFS, thanks.

> Must fix:
>   - The mmap-versus-truncate NFS problem appears to be a lot more
>     difficult to reproduce these days. I need a call for testing to
>     verify that the problem still exists.
>   - I'm mystified by Andi's comments about RPC having lots of
>     uninterruptible waits. It sounds to me as if he is confusing the
>     "soft" and "intr" options. The two are very distinct...
> 
> Should fix:
>   - The VFS support for atomic open() has already been merged by Linus
>     (as well as the NFSv2/v3 support). I still have a couple of
>     trivial bugfixes for the VFS case (one place where we used O_READ
>     instead of FMODE_READ, and one place where the "intent" is not
>     filled in at all). NFSv4 support needs for atomic open to be
>     merged in (this will fix several NFSv4 file creation races).
> 
> 
> Not listed in either:
>   - There are a few lockd fixes that need to be forward-ported from
>     2.4.x.
> 
>   - A *lot* of progress has been made on the NFSv4 client. I would
>     very much like to merge this into 2.6.x ASAP, since it concerns
>     rather critical subjects such as adding support for locking, and
>     reboot recovery (as well as lots of stability fixes). What are
>     your feelings on a timeframe for this sort of thing?

I doubt that people will be critially dependent on NFS4 client
functionality in 2.6 for a while, and your changes will only affect NFS4,
so go wild.

If the change was more intrusive then it would be better to
maintain+develop it in -mm until we've all happy, then merge it across.

>   - The RPCSEC_GSS support for NFSv2/v3 was merged in before it had
>     been thoroughly tested and reviewed. It contains a couple of
>     serious bugs that need to be ironed out.
> 
> If you want info beyond this mail, then my current set of NFS client
> patches may be found on
> 
>    http://www.fys.uio.no/~trondmy/src/Linux-2.6.x/2.6.0-test11
> 
> The file HEADER.html contains a list of patches and a brief
> description of what each patch does. That should give an idea of how
> much is currently outstanding (I still expect the list to continue
> growing - I'm still working on several NFSv4 subtopics).

OK.

Re: Linux 2.6.0

[Trond Myklebust]

>>>>> " " == Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> writes:

     > I doubt that people will be critially dependent on NFS4 client
     > functionality in 2.6 for a while, and your changes will only
     > affect NFS4, so go wild.

     > If the change was more intrusive then it would be better to
     > maintain+develop it in -mm until we've all happy, then merge it
     > across.

Thanks... There are some fairly major changes to the NFS attribute
revalidation that I'm working on right now, and that will be likely to
come in the second category (as they affect NFSv2/v3 and v4). They
promise some definite caching wins, though, so I'll try to push them
into 'mm' as soon as I'm satisfied with their stability...

All the rest of the patches should come in the first category, though
I'll make sure that I label any NFSv2/v3 changes clearly FYI.

Cheers,
  Trond

Re: Linux 2.6.0

[ismail 'cartman' dönmez]

On Thursday 18 December 2003 07:15, Andrew Morton wrote:
> There are also the "must-fix" and "should-fix" lists of items which we have
> identified as still on the 2.6 todo list.  These are at
>
> ftp://ftp.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/akpm/must-fix/must-fix-7.txt
> and
> ftp://ftp.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/akpm/must-fix/should-fix-7.txt
>

Wondering if ALSA and Latest Usb updates from Greg KH will make it into 
2.6.1 ?

Regards,
/ismail


-- 
Joe Random Hacker Since 2002

Re: Linux 2.6.0

[Greg KH]

On Thu, Dec 18, 2003 at 11:12:43AM +0200, ismail 'cartman' dönmez wrote:
> On Thursday 18 December 2003 07:15, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > There are also the "must-fix" and "should-fix" lists of items which we have
> > identified as still on the 2.6 todo list.  These are at
> >
> > ftp://ftp.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/akpm/must-fix/must-fix-7.txt
> > and
> > ftp://ftp.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/akpm/must-fix/should-fix-7.txt
> >
> 
> Wondering if ALSA and Latest Usb updates from Greg KH will make it into 
> 2.6.1 ?

I have USB, I2C, driver class, and PCI patches that I will be carefully
feeding in...


thanks,

greg k-h

Re: Linux 2.6.0

[Maciej Soltysiak]

> Wondering if ALSA and Latest Usb updates from Greg KH will make it into
> 2.6.1 ?
Is anything known about reiserfs4 becoming stable enough to be included some
time soon. Maybe around 2.6.3-5

Regards,
Maciej

Re: Linux 2.6.0

[Matt H.]

Will it be finished by then ? Last I looked at it .. it was still in beta 
testing.. 

Matt H.

On Thursday 18 December 2003 02:48 am, Maciej Soltysiak wrote:
> > Wondering if ALSA and Latest Usb updates from Greg KH will make it into
> > 2.6.1 ?
>
> Is anything known about reiserfs4 becoming stable enough to be included
> some time soon. Maybe around 2.6.3-5
>
> Regards,
> Maciej
>
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Re: Linux 2.6.0

[Jens Axboe]

On Thu, Dec 18 2003, Matt H. wrote:
> Will it be finished by then ? Last I looked at it .. it was still in beta 
> testing.. 

I think you mean alpha.

-- 
Jens Axboe

Re: Linux 2.6.0

[Maciej Soltysiak]

> > Will it be finished by then ? Last I looked at it .. it was still in
beta
> > testing..
>
> I think you mean alpha.
Ouch, for a moment I thought that it is going to stabilize soon.
Thanks for clarifing this.

Regards,
Maciej

Re: Linux 2.6.0

[Hans Reiser]

Maciej Soltysiak wrote:

>>Wondering if ALSA and Latest Usb updates from Greg KH will make it into
>>2.6.1 ?
>>    
>>
>Is anything known about reiserfs4 becoming stable enough to be included some
>time soon. Maybe around 2.6.3-5
>  
>
We are still able to hit bugs without the help of users, and being 
unable to hit bugs ourselves is our release criterion, but ask again 
next month.....

-- 
Hans

reiser4 in 2.6 was Re: Linux 2.6.0

[Maciej Soltysiak]

Hi,

I remember reporting some bugs some time ago,
I think I'll give it some testing again to support the project.

Regards,
Maciej

Re: reiser4 in 2.6 was Re: Linux 2.6.0

[Hans Reiser]

Maciej Soltysiak wrote:

>Hi,
>
>I remember reporting some bugs some time ago,
>I think I'll give it some testing again to support the project.
>
>  
>
Thanks kindly, grev on the cc line is managing our known bugs list.  You 
should probably wait for the next snapshot though, grev can you tell him 
when we issue it?



-- 
Hans

Re: reiser4 in 2.6 was Re: Linux 2.6.0

[E. Gryaznova]

Hans Reiser wrote:

> Maciej Soltysiak wrote:
>
> >Hi,
> >
> >I remember reporting some bugs some time ago,
> >I think I'll give it some testing again to support the project.
> >
> >
> >
> Thanks kindly, grev on the cc line is managing our known bugs list.  You
> should probably wait for the next snapshot though, grev can you tell him
> when we issue it?

Sure.
Maciej, I will let you know immediately after the new reiser4 snapshot will
be released.

Thanks,
Lena

>
> --
> Hans

Re: Linux 2.6.0

[bill davidsen]

In article <006201c3c54c$2bb00c50$0e25fe0a@southpark.ae.poznan.pl>,
Maciej Soltysiak <solt@dns.toxicfilms.tv> wrote:
| > Wondering if ALSA and Latest Usb updates from Greg KH will make it into
| > 2.6.1 ?
| Is anything known about reiserfs4 becoming stable enough to be included some
| time soon. Maybe around 2.6.3-5

I think that's vastly optimistic. As Hans has reported, it's still
pretty alpha as yet. And you can thank him for not releasing it until
he's happy with it!

I would guess it will be in 2.7 first, and backported when stable, but
that's sure not my call, so feel free to disagree.
-- 
bill davidsen <davidsen@tmr.com>
  CTO, TMR Associates, Inc
Doing interesting things with little computers since 1979.

Re: Linux 2.6.0

[Hans Reiser]

bill davidsen wrote:

>In article <006201c3c54c$2bb00c50$0e25fe0a@southpark.ae.poznan.pl>,
>Maciej Soltysiak <solt@dns.toxicfilms.tv> wrote:
>| > Wondering if ALSA and Latest Usb updates from Greg KH will make it into
>| > 2.6.1 ?
>| Is anything known about reiserfs4 becoming stable enough to be included some
>| time soon. Maybe around 2.6.3-5
>
>I think that's vastly optimistic. As Hans has reported, it's still
>pretty alpha as yet. And you can thank him for not releasing it until
>he's happy with it!
>  
>
I don't think it is vastly optimistic, I hope we can send something in 
next month, but you probably know how hard it is to estimate the time to 
the last findable bug for a large project like ours.

>I would guess it will be in 2.7 first, and backported when stable, but
>that's sure not my call, so feel free to disagree.
>  
>


-- 
Hans

Re: Linux 2.6.0

[Jens Axboe]

On Thu, Dec 18 2003, Hans Reiser wrote:
> bill davidsen wrote:
> 
> >In article <006201c3c54c$2bb00c50$0e25fe0a@southpark.ae.poznan.pl>,
> >Maciej Soltysiak <solt@dns.toxicfilms.tv> wrote:
> >| > Wondering if ALSA and Latest Usb updates from Greg KH will make it into
> >| > 2.6.1 ?
> >| Is anything known about reiserfs4 becoming stable enough to be included 
> >some
> >| time soon. Maybe around 2.6.3-5
> >
> >I think that's vastly optimistic. As Hans has reported, it's still
> >pretty alpha as yet. And you can thank him for not releasing it until
> >he's happy with it!
> > 
> >
> I don't think it is vastly optimistic, I hope we can send something in 
> next month, but you probably know how hard it is to estimate the time to 
> the last findable bug for a large project like ours.

Not to mention the months long period of actually getting user testing
and fixing all of those bugs before it's qualifiable for kernel
inclusion.

I hope you don't expect to actually have something that's worthy of
being merged into 2.6.x in a months time?

-- 
Jens Axboe

Re: Linux 2.6.0

[Ed Tomlinson]

On December 18, 2003 02:42 pm, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 18 2003, Hans Reiser wrote:
> > bill davidsen wrote:
> > >In article <006201c3c54c$2bb00c50$0e25fe0a@southpark.ae.poznan.pl>,
> > >
> > >Maciej Soltysiak <solt@dns.toxicfilms.tv> wrote:
> > >| > Wondering if ALSA and Latest Usb updates from Greg KH will make it
> > >| > into 2.6.1 ?
> > >|
> > >| Is anything known about reiserfs4 becoming stable enough to be
> > >| included
> > >
> > >some
> > >
> > >| time soon. Maybe around 2.6.3-5
> > >
> > >I think that's vastly optimistic. As Hans has reported, it's still
> > >pretty alpha as yet. And you can thank him for not releasing it until
> > >he's happy with it!
> >
> > I don't think it is vastly optimistic, I hope we can send something in
> > next month, but you probably know how hard it is to estimate the time to
> > the last findable bug for a large project like ours.
>
> Not to mention the months long period of actually getting user testing
> and fixing all of those bugs before it's qualifiable for kernel
> inclusion.
>
> I hope you don't expect to actually have something that's worthy of
> being merged into 2.6.x in a months time?

I would hope it could go into mm though...  That would give a good 
test base.

Ed Tomlinson

Re: Linux 2.6.0

[Hans Reiser]

Jens Axboe wrote:

>
>
>I hope you don't expect to actually have something that's worthy of
>being merged into 2.6.x in a months time?
>
>  
>
Have you looked at the stability of the typical experimental feature?  
If we used that as a guide, we'd have sent it in 3 months ago.....;-)

We will have something we think is appropriate for inclusion as an 
experimental feature very soon now.  Because our test scripts have 
become much more sophisticated, it means more when we say we cannot 
crash it, and it will go from experimental to stable faster than V3 
did.  I won't predict how fast.

-- 
Hans

Re: Linux 2.6.0

[Jens Axboe]

On Fri, Dec 19 2003, Hans Reiser wrote:
> Jens Axboe wrote:
> 
> >
> >
> >I hope you don't expect to actually have something that's worthy of
> >being merged into 2.6.x in a months time?
> >
> > 
> >
> Have you looked at the stability of the typical experimental feature?  
> If we used that as a guide, we'd have sent it in 3 months ago.....;-)

I don't think that's true. Plus, a file system (even more true in the
case of reiser4) is a huge complex beast. A driver is a lot less
complex.

> We will have something we think is appropriate for inclusion as an 
> experimental feature very soon now.  Because our test scripts have 
> become much more sophisticated, it means more when we say we cannot 
> crash it, and it will go from experimental to stable faster than V3 
> did.  I won't predict how fast.

Well v3 was merged too soon to, but at that time there was a big motive
to do just that - get a journalled fs in the kernel. With v4 that just
isn't the case.

I don't doubt you have great testing scripts, but nothing beats real
life testing.

-- 
Jens Axboe

Re: Linux 2.6.0

[Marcel Holtmann]

Hi Andrew,

> - Please report any problems to the appropriate mailing list.  If you do
>   not know which list to use, send the report to linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
>   and it should reach the right person.  Some active subsystem mailing lists
>   are:
> 
> 	linux1394-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> 	linux-xfs@oss.sgi.com
> 	linux-acpi@intel.com
> 	linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org
> 	ext2-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> 	linux-usb-users@lists.sourceforge.net

for Bluetooth related problems, people should use

	bluez-devel@lists.sourceforge.net

However the Bluetooth subsystem of 2.4 is much more up-to-date and I
hope we can catch up for 2.6.1 ;)

Regards

Marcel

Re: Linux 2.6.0

[Joseph Pingenot]

>From Marcel Holtmann on Thursday, 18 December, 2003:
>Hi Andrew,
>> - Please report any problems to the appropriate mailing list.  If you do
>>   not know which list to use, send the report to linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
>>   and it should reach the right person.  Some active subsystem mailing lists
>>   are:
>> 	linux1394-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
>> 	linux-xfs@oss.sgi.com
>> 	linux-acpi@intel.com
>> 	linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org
>> 	ext2-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
>> 	linux-usb-users@lists.sourceforge.net
>for Bluetooth related problems, people should use
>	bluez-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
>However the Bluetooth subsystem of 2.4 is much more up-to-date and I
>hope we can catch up for 2.6.1 ;)

Hey, could a List of Lists be put on kernel.org?  I'm not looking forward
  to having to fish through the thread again to find the appropriate list
  when I get up the courage to try 2.6.0 on my workstation again.  :)

-Joseph

-- 
Joseph===============================================trelane@digitasaru.net
      Graduate Student in Physics, Freelance Free Software Developer

Re: Linux 2.6.0

[Andrew Morton]

Joseph Pingenot <trelane@digitasaru.net> wrote:
>
> Hey, could a List of Lists be put on kernel.org?

Most of them are (and should be) mentioned in the MAINTAINERS file
distributed with the kernel.  The bluetooth list seems to be missing
though.

List of mailing lists (was Re: Linux 2.6.0)

[Rob Landley]

On Thursday 18 December 2003 10:22, Andrew Morton wrote:
> Joseph Pingenot <trelane@digitasaru.net> wrote:
> > Hey, could a List of Lists be put on kernel.org?
>
> Most of them are (and should be) mentioned in the MAINTAINERS file
> distributed with the kernel.  The bluetooth list seems to be missing
> though.

Here's another interesting resource:

http://vger.kernel.org/vger-lists.html

Rob

Re: Linux 2.6.0

[Michael Hunold]

Hello Andrew,

> - Please report any problems to the appropriate mailing list.  If you do
>   not know which list to use, send the report to linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
>   and it should reach the right person.  Some active subsystem mailing lists
>   are:
> 
> 	linux1394-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> 	linux-xfs@oss.sgi.com
> 	linux-acpi@intel.com
> 	linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org
> 	ext2-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> 	linux-usb-users@lists.sourceforge.net

Please use <linux-dvb@linuxtv.org> for everything related to the DVB 
subsystem and DVB drivers (ie. drivers/media/dvb).

I have a bunch of patches regarding the DVB subsystem and the various 
drivers here. They have accumulated because I did not want to disturb 
Linus with "misc fixes in driver foo" patches.

Additionally, we (ie. the LinuxTV.org project) are planning to remove 
all compiled-in firmware blobs and instead use the new firmware loading 
facilities. I have a patch for the firmware loading here, too.

Can you please tell me if and when I can send you these patches?

For your information: the DVB subsystem and the drivers are hosted at
http://linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/

The driver can be used under 2.4 and 2.6 as well and is used mainly in 
Europe. In the past, I simply sent the patches to lkml and Linus 
directly. Except Alan Cox and Christoph Hellwig apparently nobody cared 
about this, perhaps mainly because the DVB system does not affect any 
other subsystem.

CU
Michael.
(LinuxTV.org CVS maintainer)

MD Raid fixed? was: Linux 2.6.0

[Mike Fedyk]

On Wed, Dec 17, 2003 at 09:15:16PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> - There are significant changes in the module subsystem, the LVM (Device
>   Mapper) and RAID subsystems.  Details about these and many other kernel

There was a thread against 2.6.test11 about some issues with MD & DM.  Also
there was one report of problems with ext3+MD.

I don't use LVM or DM, so I'm interested in the second case.

Thanks

Re: MD Raid fixed? was: Linux 2.6.0

[Neil Brown]

On Thursday December 18, mfedyk@matchmail.com wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 17, 2003 at 09:15:16PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > - There are significant changes in the module subsystem, the LVM (Device
> >   Mapper) and RAID subsystems.  Details about these and many other kernel
> 
> There was a thread against 2.6.test11 about some issues with MD & DM.  Also
> there was one report of problems with ext3+MD.
> 
> I don't use LVM or DM, so I'm interested in the second case.

There was a raid5 problem that could trigger under xfs or any
filesystem over DM, and the fix for that is in 2.6.0

I am not aware of a problem with ext3 over MD without DM in between.

NeilBrown

Re: Linux 2.6.0

[Krishna Akella]

Truly amazing job!!! Bravo!!!

--
Krishna Akella

-----------------------------------------------------------------
They cannot break our spirit, for we do not care if they like us. They
cannot run us out of business, for it is our passion not our livelihood.
They cannot deceive us, because it is in the open. They cannot lie about
us, for we hide nothing. They cannot fight us, for we are legion...

		--Courpus_Callosum. On Open Software.
-----------------------------------------------------------------

On Wed, 17 Dec 2003, Linus Torvalds wrote:

>
> 				"The beaver is out of detox"
> 						- Anon
>
> This should not be a big surprise to anybody on the list any more, since
> we've been building up to it for a long time now, and for the last few
> weeks I haven't accepted any patches except for what amounts to fairly
> obvious one-liners.

> To give you an example, one of the nastier bugs that we chased for the
> last five weeks was a bug that could only be reproduced reliably on a
> 16- or 32-way system, and only when the system had flaky disks. Putting in
> known-good disks made the problem disappear. Similarly, compiling the
> kernel with another compiler made the problem disappear.
>
> It turned out to be a really subtle bug wrt SMP ordering and stack
> allocation, and lots of thanks to Ram Pai for gathering all the
> information that eventually led to it being fixed. The fix was a one-liner
> and a big comment - but my point is that the quality of bugs has been
> pretty high lately, and we feel that we're in pretty good shape.

>
> 		Linus
>
> ---

Re: Linux 2.6.0

[Gabor MICSKO]

Congratulation for all developers to make it real. Thanks for the great
job!


-- 
Windows not found
(C)heers, (P)arty or (D)ance?
-----------------------------------
Micskó Gábor
HP Accredited Platform Specialist, System Engineer (APS, ASE)
Szintézis Computer Rendszerház Rt.      
H-9021 Győr, Tihanyi Árpád út.2.
Tel: +36 96 502-216
Fax: +36 96 318-658
E-mail: gmicsko@szintezis.hu
Web: http://www.hup.hu/

Re: Linux 2.6.0

[Clemens Schwaighofer]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Linus Torvalds wrote:
| 				"The beaver is out of detox"
| 						- Anon

Lucky for, I just finished bootstrap of debian and the basic in stall of
the dev packages and was just about to pull 2.4.23 when I saw this mail
in LKML. Congrats to all developers and all those brave people testing
the whole 2.5 series from beginning.

btw, 2.6.0 is happily running ...

Linux debian-test 2.6.0 #1 Thu Dec 18 15:45:55 JST 2003 i686 GNU/Linux

- --
Clemens Schwaighofer - IT Engineer & System Administration
==========================================================
Tequila Japan, 6-17-2 Ginza Chuo-ku, Tokyo 104-8167, JAPAN
Tel: +81-(0)3-3545-7703            Fax: +81-(0)3-3545-7343
http://www.tequila.jp
==========================================================
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQE/4VZyjBz/yQjBxz8RAj61AKCr3SVE5XcN+rVWNhkdiieE/RSsVwCg3SaK
X8FIznT0np/oxj01roL5ER4=
=CZTy
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: Linux 2.6.0

[Andrew Walrond]

On Thursday 18 Dec 2003 4:14 am, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> 				"The beaver is out of detox"
> 						- Anon

Just want to add my voice to the chorus.  Fantastic work everybody. I'm just 
busting with pride at what this disparate, passionate, argumentative, 
arrogant, unassuming, pigheaded and exceptional bunch of people manages to 
achieve, again and again.

My wishlist for 2004

1) Drivers, drivers, drivers. Any of you who have influence, lobby h/w 
manufacturers for linux support. ([Grinds teeth] mutter....centrino...
mutter...). And _please_ nuture all the ones we do have. Talk to them, stroke 
them, polish the paintwork...

2) Amd-64 to become the default arch (Unless I get a centrino driver)

3) Andrew Mortons need/should-fix lists to be different in 2.8  ;)

4) Enroll for my Egg Sucking classes, and bring your granny :)

Merry Christmas, and thanks for the Mighty Gift!

Andrew Walrond

Re: Linux 2.6.0

[Carlos Jiménez]

Good work :)

About centrino, I have a toshiba m10 laptop (centrino 1.5Ghz). So if you
need test any code over centrino email me.
I continue suscribed to this list.
El jue, 18-12-2003 a las 10:56, Andrew Walrond escribió:
> On Thursday 18 Dec 2003 4:14 am, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > 				"The beaver is out of detox"
> > 						- Anon
> 
> Just want to add my voice to the chorus.  Fantastic work everybody. I'm just 
> busting with pride at what this disparate, passionate, argumentative, 
> arrogant, unassuming, pigheaded and exceptional bunch of people manages to 
> achieve, again and again.
> 
> My wishlist for 2004
> 
> 1) Drivers, drivers, drivers. Any of you who have influence, lobby h/w 
> manufacturers for linux support. ([Grinds teeth] mutter....centrino...
> mutter...). And _please_ nuture all the ones we do have. Talk to them, stroke 
> them, polish the paintwork...
> 
> 2) Amd-64 to become the default arch (Unless I get a centrino driver)
> 
> 3) Andrew Mortons need/should-fix lists to be different in 2.8  ;)
> 
> 4) Enroll for my Egg Sucking classes, and bring your granny :)
> 
> Merry Christmas, and thanks for the Mighty Gift!
> 
> Andrew Walrond
> 
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/
> 

Re: Linux 2.6.0

[iain d broadfoot]

* Linus Torvalds (torvalds@osdl.org) wrote:
> 				"The beaver is out of detox"
> 						- Anon

	Hurrah!

-- 
"If sharing a thing in no way diminishes it, it is not
rightly owned if it is not shared." -- St. Augustine
#rm -rf /
http://www.geeksoc.org/

Diskstats inconsistancy between 2.4.23 & 2.6 was: Linux 2.6.0

[Mike Fedyk]

A while back there was a flamewar about adding diskstats to
/proc/partitions, and so /proc/diskstats was created, also it is a config
option in 2.4.  In 2.6, the stats are in /proc/partitions, but there is no
/proc/diskstats or config option.

Is /proc/diskstats going to be forward ported?

Re: Diskstats inconsistancy between 2.4.23 & 2.6 was: Linux 2.6.0

[William Lee Irwin III]

On Thu, Dec 18, 2003 at 06:18:45PM -0800, Mike Fedyk wrote:
> A while back there was a flamewar about adding diskstats to
> /proc/partitions, and so /proc/diskstats was created, also it is a config
> option in 2.4.  In 2.6, the stats are in /proc/partitions, but there is no
> /proc/diskstats or config option.
> Is /proc/diskstats going to be forward ported?

No idea what you're on about; /proc/diskstats is alive and well here.


-- wli

Re: Diskstats inconsistancy between 2.4.23 & 2.6 was: Linux 2.6.0

[Mike Fedyk]

On Thu, Dec 18, 2003 at 06:32:31PM -0800, William Lee Irwin III wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 18, 2003 at 06:18:45PM -0800, Mike Fedyk wrote:
> > A while back there was a flamewar about adding diskstats to
> > /proc/partitions, and so /proc/diskstats was created, also it is a config
> > option in 2.4.  In 2.6, the stats are in /proc/partitions, but there is no
> > /proc/diskstats or config option.
> > Is /proc/diskstats going to be forward ported?
> 
> No idea what you're on about; /proc/diskstats is alive and well here.

Crap, crap crap.  I was looking at the wrong window...

Thanks