Page 18 of 19 FirstFirst ... 816171819 LastLast
Results 171 to 180 of 185

Thread: The Huge Disaster Within The Linux 2.6.35 Kernel

  1. #171
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    2,264

    Default

    @Cynyr,
    What triggered my post was "the first thing I would have looked at" part. As if you implied (my words): "I would have done it ten times better", to which I was like "but you didn't".

  2. #172
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    61

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by V!NCENT View Post
    @Cynyr,
    What triggered my post was "the first thing I would have looked at" part. As if you implied (my words): "I would have done it ten times better", to which I was like "but you didn't".
    ahh, i guess my point was, i look at top (not usually iotop) before running even a simple benchmark like hdparm, if i care about having decent results. I would expect a test suite designed for benchmarking a large number of systems in to check for an idle system prior to running tests.

    The thing that rubbed me about this, is that if SOP here isn't to look at those sorts of things to ensure a consistent test setup prior to running benchmarks, then all benchmark results are going to be suspect IMHO.

  3. #173
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    271

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cynyr View Post
    ahh, i guess my point was, i look at top (not usually iotop) before running even a simple benchmark like hdparm, if i care about having decent results. I would expect a test suite designed for benchmarking a large number of systems in to check for an idle system prior to running tests.

    The thing that rubbed me about this, is that if SOP here isn't to look at those sorts of things to ensure a consistent test setup prior to running benchmarks, then all benchmark results are going to be suspect IMHO.
    But is is a consistent setup. Getting a top measurement from before benchmarking is great if you're running a live desktop box, doing a comparison between disparate systems, etc. But that's not what this is. This is "Benchmark. Replace Kernel. Benchmark. Replace Kernel. Benchmark." If something is screwed up between benchmarks, it's due to the replacement kernel. Having a top number might give you more information about what part is causing the slowdown, but it doesn't remove the fact that there is a slowdown, which is all that the Phoromatic is designed to test. The fact it broke udev is secondary to the actual problem.

    Again, Phoromatic is not a diagnosis tool, it is a benchmark. It is designed to tell you how fast, not why it is or isn't as fast as you're expecting.

  4. #174
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    10

    Default

    Yes, I agree that this is a bit large for such a minor thing.
    Still within the merge window (or shortly after) then regressions like this are expected.

    I wouldn't say stop warning us.. Back when I used an NVIDIA card, I used beta drivers and would appreciate the "heads-up" about a specific beta driver running slow.

    I wouldn't expect so much hoopla over it though.
    Maybe some simple graphs and enough testing to say "actually, yes, it is a problem with the drivers / software".

    I say continue warning us - but just try to keep it to 1 page with a summary / enlarging summary pic showing some combined graphs.

  5. #175
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Scotland
    Posts
    99

    Default The actual reason for Michael's post

    Michael seems to be RedHat's dog, Rover.

    The RedHat developers, and in particular, Dave Airlie have come under intense scrutiny and criticism by core kernel developers, for their inept and ultimately damaging stupidity.

    Michael, who is partly funded by RedHat, appears to have been asked to redress the balance, as it were. And the net result is a damaging hit-piece that comes straight off the front page of the News Of The World or National Enquirer.

    But this is not the first time Michael has not been impartial, by any means. And it certainly won't be the last.

    Hey Michael - Fetch that stick ! Good doggy !

  6. #176
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    912

    Default

    How about we keep the personal attacks away?

  7. #177

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gordboy View Post
    Michael seems to be RedHat's dog, Rover.

    The RedHat developers, and in particular, Dave Airlie have come under intense scrutiny and criticism by core kernel developers, for their inept and ultimately damaging stupidity.

    Michael, who is partly funded by RedHat, appears to have been asked to redress the balance, as it were. And the net result is a damaging hit-piece that comes straight off the front page of the News Of The World or National Enquirer.

    But this is not the first time Michael has not been impartial, by any means. And it certainly won't be the last.

    Hey Michael - Fetch that stick ! Good doggy !
    I am funded by Red Hat? Wow, since when? I didn't know.

  8. #178
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,726

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gordboy View Post
    Michael seems to be RedHat's dog, Rover.

    The RedHat developers, and in particular, Dave Airlie have come under intense scrutiny and criticism by core kernel developers, for their inept and ultimately damaging stupidity.

    Michael, who is partly funded by RedHat, appears to have been asked to redress the balance, as it were. And the net result is a damaging hit-piece that comes straight off the front page of the News Of The World or National Enquirer.

    But this is not the first time Michael has not been impartial, by any means. And it certainly won't be the last.

    Hey Michael - Fetch that stick ! Good doggy !
    and you have any evidence for your claims? Starting with Airlie being intensely critized to Redhats involvement? I am sure whoever does Phoronix accounting would be delighted.

  9. #179
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    327

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gordboy View Post
    Michael seems to be RedHat's dog, Rover.

    The RedHat developers, and in particular, Dave Airlie have come under intense scrutiny and criticism by core kernel developers, for their inept and ultimately damaging stupidity.

    Michael, who is partly funded by RedHat, appears to have been asked to redress the balance, as it were. And the net result is a damaging hit-piece that comes straight off the front page of the News Of The World or National Enquirer.

    But this is not the first time Michael has not been impartial, by any means. And it certainly won't be the last.

    Hey Michael - Fetch that stick ! Good doggy !
    get the conspiracy bibles out folks, the islamists are waging a war on any bar redhat

  10. #180
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Connecticut,USA
    Posts
    962

    Default

    Oh snap, our good friend gordboy is back


    Whenever he posts the lulz follows.

    Right now who gives a snap as the problem's been resolved. In the future I am sure Michael will give more detailed information about a problem that Phoromatic detects so that kernel devs will take a look at it.

    I do think that michael should provide a meaningful bug report when an issue is detected and where the problem lies rather than blaring it out. The kernel devs are a hard working bunch that don't need to be screamed at like kids.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

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