linux-kernel - Re: Patch "sched: Give CPU bound RT tasks preference" has been added to the 2.6.32-longterm tree

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: <1297935668.5411.21.camel@marge.simson.net>
Date:	Thu, 17 Feb 2011 10:41:08 +0100
From:	Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>
To:	Stefan Richter <stefanr@...6.in-berlin.de>
Cc:	Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@...il.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>, gregkh@...e.de,
	srostedt <srostedt@...hat.com>, a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl,
	ghaskins@...ell.com, stable@...nel.org,
	stable-commits@...r.kernel.org, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Patch "sched: Give CPU bound RT tasks preference" has been
 added to the 2.6.32-longterm tree

On Thu, 2011-02-17 at 08:52 +0100, Stefan Richter wrote:
> On Feb 17 Mike Galbraith wrote:
> > On Wed, 2011-02-16 at 15:29 +0100, Stefan Richter wrote:
> > > Jiri,
> > > if the desire is to improve performance of existing features (and maybe
> > > add this and that little feature that looks attractive), while at the same
> > > time you want
> > >   - experts to have looked at these improvements,
> > >   - packagers to avoid duplicate work,
> > >   - keep the number of local patches in check,
> > > then the solution is to /stay close enough to the mainline/.
> 
> [By which I meant updating, not backporting.]

[but you know that ain't an option too]

> > People are fixing this and that in their enterprise kernels privately
> > every day.  The only difference between that, and pushing baked fixes
> > back is that pushing to stable is visible.  I strongly suspect that
> > there are just tons of mainline backports sitting in each and every
> > enterprise tree in existence.
> 
> 'Visible' = the change which was an important performance improvement or
> outright fix at site A (and a nice-to-have improvement on sites B...X)
> eventually exhibits a regression at site Y.

Known bugs are stable bugs, known performance problems are stable
performance problems is the only answer to that.  Leaving them as is
does remove risk of a customer satisfaction delta.. but..  

But whatever.  Yeah, I understand that it's a sticky wicket.

	-Mike

--
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/