Fedora Is Looking For Help Testing Linux 5.10 Ahead Of Shipping That LTS Kernel Update

[phoronix]

Phoronix: Fedora Is Looking For Help Testing Linux 5.10 Ahead Of Shipping That LTS Kernel Update

Fedora is preparing to ship the Linux 5.10 LTS kernel as a stable release update to those on Fedora 32 and newer...

http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...x-5.10-Testing

[rene]

it would help if someone fixes the 500 to 200% btrfs performance regression till then: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NhUMdvLyKJc

[Charlie68]

it would help if someone fixes the 500 to 200% btrfs performance regression till then: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NhUMdvLyKJc

I believe that being this LTS kernel, there will be a solution to this regression.
I use Btrfs on all my systems, I didn't realize the regression on the 5.10 kernel, however I haven't done any file operations these days.

[piorunz]

I am using Manjaro and 5.10 is already there. I'm not worried about performance Btrfs regressions, as in daily desktop use that would be barely visible anyway. I have Btrfs RAID1 on / (SSDs), and Btrfs RAID1 too on /home & /var (HDDs).

[SteamPunker]

This is one aspect where Fedora has an advantage over Ubuntu in my experience: in Fedora, users periodically receive stable kernel updates, even when they're not running the latest release of Fedora. Ubuntu, in contrast, is very conservative when it comes to what kernel version to ship with their releases, in my opinion overly so. As a result, they often have to backport certain newer features such as Wireguard support, support for newer GPUs and sound devices, etc, which requires them to maintain such backports in older kernels as well.

Not going for the cutting edge and sticking to proven and mature versions is all well and good, but I believe Ubuntu is being too timid. The same goes with their choice of versions for glibc, X.org, systemd and other core system components.

[JackLilhammers]

This is one aspect where Fedora has an advantage over Ubuntu in my experience: in Fedora, users periodically receive stable kernel updates, even when they're not running the latest release of Fedora. Ubuntu, in contrast, is very conservative when it comes to what kernel version to ship with their releases, in my opinion overly so. As a result, they often have to backport certain newer features such as Wireguard support, support for newer GPUs and sound devices, etc, which requires them to maintain such backports in older kernels as well.

Not going for the cutting edge and sticking to proven and mature versions is all well and good, but I believe Ubuntu is being too timid. The same goes with their choice of versions for glibc, X.org, systemd and other core system components.

They're using 5.4 for 20.04, which is still fairly new. And with HWE they'll upgrade it.
For production systems is much more important the stability provided by keeping the same kernel rather than upgrading to the last version.

eg: 10 days ago I was testing Fedora 33 on a Lattepanda that I would like to use on an embedded project and after upgrading to kernel version 5.9 it would not wake up from suspension anymore. While it's kind of expected from Fedora, it's simply unacceptable for a production system.

[SteamPunker]

I agree breakage is bad. User space compatibility is guaranteed with kernel updates, but non-mainlined kernel drivers often break with major kernel upgrades. You're right about that being unacceptable in production environments.

I guess the fact that there is only one Ubunto distro, as opposed tot Red Hat having RHEL, Fedora and Rawhide, requires Canonical to be conservative. But sometimes it's really disappointing to see how outdated some of these core components are, even in the latest Ubuntu release.

[MadeUpName]

I have been running the 5.10 kernel out of the F34 repo for about a week now on my main desktop. Nothing to see here.

[zxy_thf]

This is one aspect where Fedora has an advantage over Ubuntu in my experience: in Fedora, users periodically receive stable kernel updates, even when they're not running the latest release of Fedora. Ubuntu, in contrast, is very conservative when it comes to what kernel version to ship with their releases, in my opinion overly so. As a result, they often have to backport certain newer features such as Wireguard support, support for newer GPUs and sound devices, etc, which requires them to maintain such backports in older kernels as well.

Not going for the cutting edge and sticking to proven and mature versions is all well and good, but I believe Ubuntu is being too timid. The same goes with their choice of versions for glibc, X.org, systemd and other core system components.

It's a tradeoff, unless Canonical can force NVIDIA to support latest kernel+compiler (or mainline its driver), the Ubuntu's approach is more appealing to new users because one of the most important drivers is well supported.

[Qaridarium]

This is one aspect where Fedora has an advantage over Ubuntu in my experience: in Fedora, users periodically receive stable kernel updates, even when they're not running the latest release of Fedora. Ubuntu, in contrast, is very conservative when it comes to what kernel version to ship with their releases, in my opinion overly so. As a result, they often have to backport certain newer features such as Wireguard support, support for newer GPUs and sound devices, etc, which requires them to maintain such backports in older kernels as well.

Not going for the cutting edge and sticking to proven and mature versions is all well and good, but I believe Ubuntu is being too timid. The same goes with their choice of versions for glibc, X.org, systemd and other core system components.

this is all because of Nvidia closed source drivers. Ubuntu is a microsoft+Nvidia paid distro,

if you have Nvidia hardware Ubuntu is what you want but if you have AMD hardware Fedora is best.

I use Fedora33 on all my systems because i only buy AMD hardware for years.