[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20100301151300.GA14825@emergent.ellipticsemi.com>
Date: Mon, 1 Mar 2010 10:13:00 -0500
From: Nick Bowler <nbowler@...iptictech.com>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>,
Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>, mingo@...hat.com,
hpa@...or.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, roland@...hat.com,
suresh.b.siddha@...el.com, tglx@...utronix.de, hjl.tools@...il.com,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Linus <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next requirements
On 08:23 Sun 28 Feb , Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@...k.pl> wrote:
>
> > > In fact those rare ways of building and booting the kernel i mentioned are
> > > probably used _more_ than half of the architectures that linux-next
> > > build-tests ...
> >
> > I don't know and you don't know either. That's just pure speculation and
> > therefore meaningless.
>
> We know various arch (and hardware) usage stats, such as:
>
> http://smolt.fedoraproject.org/static/stats/stats.html
>
> Today's stats, done amongst users who are willing to opt in to the Smolt
> daemon:
>
> x86: 99.7%
> powerpc: 0.3%
>
> x86 used to be 99.5 a year ago, so the world has become even more x86-centric.
This only tells us that _smolt users_ have become even more x86-centric.
As a self-selected sample, it is very likely a poor representative of
"the world" and any such extrapolation is indeed "pure speculation".
--
Nick Bowler, Elliptic Technologies (http://www.elliptictech.com/)
--
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