Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Linux 3.9-rc5 Kernel Is Not Really Peculiar

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Linux 3.9-rc5 Kernel Is Not Really Peculiar

    Phoronix: Linux 3.9-rc5 Kernel Is Not Really Peculiar

    Linus Torvalds released Linux 3.9-rc5 on Easter. This kernel midway through the Linux 3.9 kernel cycle isn't particularly thrilling but does provide fixes for new features...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTM0MDA

  • #2


    Now, everyone picture Linus stuffing himself with this.

    Shit's actually really good

    Comment


    • #3
      usb fail

      Kernel 3.9-rc5 has trouble with USB [3.9-rc4 is ok] ... does not mount properly the USB drives ... for example, KDE does not show information about the new drive, and you will not see errors in dmesg :P

      sorry for "the mess" I think this is KDE bug ... or not ? ... now I am going to testing it

      PS. ok already I'm sure ... is certainly, a kernel error. At the 3.9-rc4 is ok, under 3.9-rc5 on 4 of my machines the same - KDE does not see the drive [goes to "manually" mount] ... but did not inform the drive is connected.
      Last edited by ext73; 04-01-2013, 05:11 PM.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by ext73 View Post
        Kernel 3.9-rc5 has trouble with USB [3.9-rc4 is ok] ... does not mount properly the USB drives ... for example, KDE does not show information about the new drive, and you will not see errors in dmesg :P

        sorry for "the mess" I think this is KDE bug ... or not ? ... now I am going to testing it

        PS. ok already I'm sure ... is certainly, a kernel error. At the 3.9-rc4 is ok, under 3.9-rc5 on 4 of my machines the same - KDE does not see the drive [goes to "manually" mount] ... but did not inform the drive is connected.
        Please report.

        Comment


        • #5
          I don't know if Michael covered this fixes when he did the original article on the Filesystem pull for 3.9, but h-online' 3.9 coverage says....

          http://www.h-online.com/open/feature...e-1831197.html
          The development team behind the still-experimental filesystem have also merged a number of other changes, including changes aimed at further improving the filesystem's fsync performance, which is considered problematic (1 and others). When defragmenting Btrfs filesystems containing snapshots, data segments shared by multiple snapshots are now preserved and are no longer subject to space-wasting splitting. A SUSE developer has also improved the send/receive code so that, if required, it will now send metadata only this is supposed to improve the efficiency of SUSE's "snapper".

          Comment

          Working...
          X