| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Sun, 21 Jan 2007 10:10:38 +0100 From: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl> To: Pavel Pisa <pisa@....felk.cvut.cz> Cc: Sunil Naidu <akula2.shark@...il.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: Realtime-preemption for 2.6.20-rc5 ? On Sun, 2007-01-21 at 00:39 +0100, Pavel Pisa wrote: > Hello Sunil and Ingo, > > Date: 2007-01-20 02:56:40 GMT (20 hours and 26 minutes ago) > > 2007-01-20, Sunil Naidu <akula2.shark@...il.com> wrote: > > I did refer the same. Is it necessary to use only base kernel, say > > 2.6.19? Or, can I go ahead with 2.6.19 + 2.6.19.2 patch + 2.6.19-rt > > patch? > > > > If yes, any reason why we need to apply rt patch only to a base kernel? > > according to my observation 2.6.19-rt15 is based/includes 2.6.19.1 changes. > > But there has been that nasty clear_page_dirty_for_io() bug causing > corruption of ext3. Even that I have tested more 2.6.20-rc + rt, > I preffer > to stay on "stable" kernel on boxes which I use daily until next stable > appears. This is a very weird statement, the -rt kernel includes so much experimental work it cannot be called 'stable' by a long shot. Sure its not known unstable, but neither is .20-rc5. If you want -rt, just run with the latest unless you have a very specific need not to. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists