Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 12 of 12

Thread: Proposed: A Tainted Performance State For The Linux Kernel

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Mar 2011


    Quote Originally Posted by bjoswald View Post
    If Linux had adequate documentation, this wouldn't be necessary. Getting others to actually read said documentation is a whole other issue, however.
    When your problem is with the documentation, then you fix the documentation and do not start with adding another option. This does not require an explanation. And when the existing documentation is not enough to comprehend the code and the code itself is not understood then it is best to stay away from the kernel, because at some point do you need to realize that there is not always someone around to hold your hand. If you want the kernel to be a playground for new programmers then you will have to get active yourself and make it so and not demand the pros to do it for you. That said, I cannot see why one would want to have newbies writing kernel code.

    Back on the topic: what could be done is to collect the options in question into a group of their own and so that these can be turned off in one (disabling the group means disabling all the options within the group). This already exists and is being done with several options. What it does not need is new kernel code to tell you that you did something wrong in your configuration.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Oct 2010


    The original TAINTED warning is not for the user, they should be aware of what binary blob kernel modules they have, that warning is for the developers investigating crashes reported by such users.
    The same way this is not necessarily for the user doing the benchmark, though it might help, but for the developer investigating the reported regression.
    Does it make sense now?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts