linux-kernel - Re: Article in Phoronix about loss of performance in 2.6.35 release candidates

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <4C047B38.9050506@tmr.com>
Date:	Mon, 31 May 2010 23:15:04 -0400
From:	Bill Davidsen <davidsen@....com>
To:	Robert Hancock <hancockrwd@...il.com>
CC:	alex.buell@...ted.org.uk,
	Mailing Lists - Kernel Developers 
	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Dave Airlie <airlied@...il.com>
Subject: Re: Article in Phoronix about loss of performance in 2.6.35 release
 candidates

Robert Hancock wrote:
> On 05/31/2010 05:19 PM, Alex Buell wrote:
>> http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=14976
>>
>> Question: Why?
> 
> Good question.. I guess it would too much to ask of them to try to 
> figure out what area the problem lies in (even to the point of figuring 
> out if it's a CPU or IO-bound problem), or try to bisect, or at least 
> report it to LKML before going to the trouble of creating 5 pages of 
> graphs.. Given the 20x slowdown in some of the benchmarks you'd think it 
> wouldn't be too hard to narrow down.

That's true, but 20x should be too hard for people to detect when they do QA 
after creating a patch, before sending it to LKML in the first place, either. If 
such a regression made it to an -rc1 then it really is kind of a big deal. Of 
course Phoronics running the tests on netbook processors is probably a good 
thing, I doubt many developers and testers are compiling kernels on a rig like 
that, or doing much of anything else demanding.

I guess I would expect people to react with dismay to the fact that such a 
problem made it undetected to rc stage, but perhaps I have too much respect for 
developers. This looks more like "how dare they not keep it quiet and just tell 
us" indignation. In the end I doubt it makes a lot of difference, if someone 
posted to LKML and Slashdot picked it up, be sure it would have hit the media 
anyway.

Should any media keep a defect quiet when they make their living informing the 
readers? I see a lot of glee among Linux users every few days when a new Windows 
bug becomes public. Phoronics tested and reported, why is that less honorable 
than Tom's Hardware telling us a new CPU sucks?

-- 
Bill Davidsen <davidsen@....com>
   "We have more to fear from the bungling of the incompetent than from
the machinations of the wicked."  - from Slashdot
--
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/