Torvalds' Comments On Linux Scheduler Woes: "Pure Garbage"

[kshade]

Games have shoddy code quality? You don't say.

[ssokolow]

he is porting rage 2 to stadia, so why not define context as rage 2?

Because you basically wrote "He's not a credible source because, in talking about porting to a platform that's capped to 60Hz, he doesn't acknowledge the existence of my 240Hz monitor"?

Whoop-de-doo. He didn't talk about the latency requirements for head-tracking without motion sickness in a platform with no VR HMD peripheral either. It's assumed that readers won't be stupid/trollish enough to need every second sentence to be qualified with a reminder that stuff irrelevant to the task at hand will be ignored.

[pal666]

Because you basically wrote "He's not a credible source because, in talking about porting to a platform that's capped to 60Hz, he doesn't acknowledge the existence of my 240Hz monitor"?

no, i didn't write that. he was talking about "in a videogame", not "on stadia". he is the developer of locking in this game and it was developed for different platform. and btw, stadia isn't capped at 60hz, only current version is, they have plans for 120 hz. i wonder who is going to rewrite games for that

Whoop-de-doo. He didn't talk about the latency requirements for head-tracking without motion

he constrained usecases to "works on my monitor", so no surprises he does locking which only works on his benchmark

[ssokolow]

no, i didn't write that. he was talking about "in a videogame", not "on stadia". he is the developer of locking in this game and it was developed for different platform
he constrained usecases to "works on my monitor", so no surprises he does locking which only works on his benchmark

OK, fair point.

[Almindor]

Just by seeing how some people here consider the Google developer to "showed himself a fool", or that he "sucks", or that he "was talking mostly out of his rear", or even making a general affirmation that "Google is becoming pathetic". This explains why words are important. If Linus would have been less rude, maybe you lot would have been less rude too.

This, to me, is the exact definition of a toxic community.

I know other open source communities where you can be told you're wrong without telling you you're stupid.

I disagree. The reason why Torvalds and most people are pissed at this guy is because he made time to make his completely wrong and toxic opinion into a blog post. It then got blown out of proportion and I'm willing to bet more than 50% of people who read it are still misinformed thinking "linux scheduling sucks" now.

This is almost a libel-level article, because it's completely wrong. The fact that it got so popular is probably not the original author's fault or possibly even intention but he's still the responsible party.

The only way to ensure this kind of "techno-libel of incompetency" gets shut down properly is to ridiule those who are arrogant enough to publicize their drivel when 100% in the wrong. This is a technical thing, not political you can't push your bullshit here...

[muncrief]

Oh sheesh my friends.

I supplied the answer to this silly spin locks problem so long ago I can barely remember now.

But perhaps it's so simple others could not understand it, so once again here's what you do.

Blast Dead or Alive's "You Spin Me Round" as loud as possible, while physically standing and spinning right round as fast as possible, until whatever necessary time has expired.

Sheesh again.

It seems like I have to do everything 'round here

[eltomito]

Uh oh, the notorious offender said "pure garbage". Is he going to rehab again?

[CochainComplex]

Thanks for the lecture, but the problem you and many others make is comparing Linus to other "project leaders" and Linux to other "software projects."

No, they are not Linus and they are not Linux. Save your bogus analogies. Not many people have built an operating system from the ground up and maintained it for 20+ years to the scale he has. He knows what he is talking about and there are FEW that are even on that level. Put some fucking respect on his name, young man.

Terms like "garbage" are prevalant is software (e.g. garbage collection, memory has garbage values), so he called it for what he saw it. And you know what, maybe I'd be a little peeved too if someone made a blog post attacking the Linux scheduler without the proper context and knowledge to back it up. And on top of that, he went in to great lengths to explain the situation to further the discussion.

So save your bullshit about "psychology" and "overcompensating" for someone else.

You are welcome and you missed my point.
No doubt what Linus is achieving on his work part is remarkable. But not on the subject of interpersonal communication.
The end justifies the means?
Because of his achievements he is a role model - The point is that people like you think if they are mimicking him they gain reputation - read your former posts - qed.
Unnecessary inappropriate words to underline your arguments - you dont need to read c.g. jung first to get that.

Somehow like those teens throwing out some rap phrases, wearing baggypants and thinking they are as cool and respectable as the drug overlords in projects nearby.
And I think exactly this is the reason why Linus decided even against his nature to take some time off and initiate a CoC plus taking some interpersonal communication courses. Especially because people with smaller (sub)projects are using his style likewise and communication now is more about who smashes the best words instead of focus on work.

To be honest the way you are choosing the words does exactly the opposite of what you want to achieve - as you have said Linus is unique if you try to copy his style and use harsh words despite of your knowledge it reduces your credibility.
EOL(esson)

[menasaw683]

Just by seeing how some people here consider the Google developer to "showed himself a fool", or that he "sucks", or that he "was talking mostly out of his rear", or even making a general affirmation that "Google is becoming pathetic". This explains why words are important. If Linus would have been less rude, maybe you lot would have been less rude too.

This, to me, is the exact definition of a toxic community.

I know other open source communities where you can be told you're wrong without telling you you're stupid.

You're just not willing to see the issue with that point of view, are you? No one in here was being rude and neither was Linus. You are the one that chose to imply that people called the Google developer 'stupid'. Yet, in not a single one of your examples do I see a single instance of the word 'stupid'. See what it is like, someone nitpicking vocabulary?

I'll grant you that some words could have been selected more... precisely but, to call them rude? That, in and of itself, is quite rude. Or, it might be perceived as such by some. You see the issue I am trying to point out here? By focussing so incredibly hard on the exact choice of words you are only contributing to the very toxicity you seek to prevent or cure. Not only because you're now part of calling people out in quite a harsh manner, over matters that are incidental but also because you're implying imposing a will onto others.

That... is rude. Very much so even.

Furthermore, by dragging on the vocabulary narrative you're only contributing to derailing the issue further and further away from where it needs to be. The Google developer in question called out an issue with the CFS scheduler. And yes, there might very well be an issue with it. And the focus should have been kept on that. And Linus mostly tried to keep it there. And so have most of us in this topic. Yet, here you are... continuing to attempt to derail it in the direction of vocabulary. Why? Why do people like you do that? And no, I do not want a literal answer. I want you to think on it for yourself. Really, I mean it... do not provide me with an answer, provide yourself with one.

Let's remain on topic, the improvement of the Linux kernel.

[ssokolow]

Somehow like those teens throwing out some rap phrases, wearing baggypants and thinking they are as cool and respectable as the drug overlords in projects nearby.

Does anyone else get an "out-of-touch grumpy grandpa" vibe out of the choice to use this analogy?

I'll grant you that some words could have been selected more... precisely but, to call them rude? That, in and of itself, is quite rude. Or, it might be perceived as such by some. You see the issue I am trying to point out here? By focussing so incredibly hard on the exact choice of words you are only contributing to the very toxicity you seek to prevent or cure. Not only because you're now part of calling people out in quite a harsh manner, over matters that are incidental but also because you're implying imposing a will onto others.

That... is rude. Very much so even.

Furthermore, by dragging on the vocabulary narrative you're only contributing to derailing the issue further and further away from where it needs to be. The Google developer in question called out an issue with the CFS scheduler. And yes, there might very well be an issue with it. And the focus should have been kept on that. And Linus mostly tried to keep it there. And so have most of us in this topic. Yet, here you are... continuing to attempt to derail it in the direction of vocabulary. Why? Why do people like you do that? And no, I do not want a literal answer. I want you to think on it for yourself. Really, I mean it... do not provide me with an answer, provide yourself with one.

I'm glad I'm not the only one who noticed that. It reminds me of this excerpt from something RationalWiki did well... this passage from the Identity politics as a vehicle for oppression section of their Identity politics page:

"speech codes" and other new forms of etiquette are some of its more conspicuous successes. In essence, identity politics is constantly generating new forms of etiquette. But, since the function of etiquette is to perform social status and rank, and all etiquettes create an underclass of the rude and uncouth^[20], identity politics constantly undermines the egalitarianism it aspires to in theory, and as such tends to exaggerate class resentments the more rigorously its new etiquettes are enforced.
Social constructionism invites us to believe that we can change the world by using different words. As such, building on its postmodernist tendencies, identity politics as an academic exercise generates a great deal of jargon. This obscurantist approach comes at a price, however — deconstructionists have been criticized for constructing elaborate systems of such jargon which seems indistinguishably like a device for wrapping empty ideas in the appearance of sophistication.

(TL;DR: Faffing about with caring about using exactly the right language fosters resentment because, on some level, we perceive its potential as a means for the powerless to gain un-earned and purely on-paper superiority over others who can't keep up with the treadmill of new etiquette.)