Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

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

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

  • #51
    Bah. Got my post flagged because I was too lazy to strip all the links from a quotation from a wiki article. Paging Michael!

    That said, I should amend it and, since I can't amend an unapproved post, here's the amendment early:

    ...that said, the thrust of the problem is definitely a fixation on ignoring how Torvalds is attacking and insulting the argument, methodology, and conclusion rather than the person making them.

    "Attack the argument, not the person making it" is the classic statement about how to argue properly.
    Last edited by ssokolow; 05 January 2020, 07:08 PM.

    Comment


    • #52
      Originally posted by ssokolow View Post

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



      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:



      (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.)
      When I was 15 it wore baggy pants too cool late 1990. So I know how I felt back then ...cool. But when you turn 30 you should start to realise that "earning respect" does not relate to cool rude phrases (at least not in the peer group I belong to). But maybe adoring "Cool Rude Linus" is common under gangsta rappers.

      p.s.: last paragraph has some valid points - I also don't like the very right language but it has to be distinguised between slight nounces not appropiate or used for rethorical shaping or feeling cool because of slamming around with a limited set of insults just for the feel good factor.
      Last edited by CochainComplex; 05 January 2020, 07:26 PM.

      Comment


      • #53
        Originally posted by Creak View Post
        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.
        No, Google developer wrote bullshit about Linux scheduler being bad. He should write another one and say: SORRY, I WAS WRONG and I wasted your time.

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

        I know other open source communities where you can be told you're wrong without telling you you're stupid.
        I know people who educate themselves and ask others before making idiotic claims. However, this Google script kiddie looks like a fool now. It makes me wonder how broken Zircon will be.

        Comment


        • #54
          Originally posted by CochainComplex View Post
          When I was 15 it wore baggy pants too cool late 1990. So I know how I felt back then ...cool. But when you turn 30 you should start to realise that "earning respect" does not relate to cool rude phrases (at least not in the peer group I belong to). But maybe adoring "Cool Rude Linus" is common under gangsta rappers.
          My point is that, to me, that analogy makes the original argument come across as less grounded in reality and more in the kind of stale "black culture is the problem" out-of-touchness Bill O'Reilly used to spew on Fox News.

          Originally posted by CochainComplex View Post
          p.s.: last paragraph has some valid points - I also don't like the very right language but it has to be distinguised between slight nounces not appropiate or used for rethorical shaping or feeling cool because of slamming around with a limited set of insults just for the feel good factor.
          Could you proofread and repeat that? I'm having trouble making sense of it.

          Comment


          • #55
            Here is a geekbench on xanmod 5.4.6 CFS and xanmod 5.4.6 BMQ

            CFS: https://browser.geekbench.com/v5/cpu/950917

            BMQ: https://browser.geekbench.com/v5/cpu/952640

            Tho geekbench is not so good and it doesnt measure gaming performance.

            Comment


            • #56
              Originally posted by Volta View Post

              While I'm not native English speaker I sometimes doubt Michael knows this language better.. Google developer sucks btw.
              Dude wasn't a google developer. He was working on Rage 2, porting it to Stadia. Google doesn't port the games.

              Comment


              • #57
                Originally posted by Beherit View Post
                ”room for improvement” is #1 on my loathe-list of corporate lingo.
                I vote for "wheelhouse" personally.

                Comment


                • #58
                  Originally posted by menasaw683 View Post
                  I disagree; wholeheartedly even. And here is why -- Assume for a moment you're at at your job and you're performing your assigned task to a sub-par standard. At some point or another, your manager will have to make you aware of this fact. And there really comes a moment at which point negative words, such as 'poor', 'no' and other such words do come into play. This is perfectly normal and always has been. Suggesting otherwise is just SJW-foolishness.

                  The nature of language requires this balance between both positive language and negative language. Whether the word is 'poor' or 'un-good', the point remains the same and always has remained the same. There literally is no way to create a natural language that does not, at some point, use words that describe things in a negative manner.

                  And the point I am making is this -- Read WHAT Linus is saying, not HOW he is saying it. The MESSAGE is important. Not the language used to convey said message. And the message itself is quite clear and hardly rude on its own. It simply is criticism of the methodology used by the Google developer to arrive at, obviously, incorrect conclusions. Again, at some point you will fail. Everyone does. And one has to be made aware of this failure. There is no way around this and no way to improve understanding other than being made aware of things we're doing wrong.

                  So, no... let's stop this excessive SJW-bullshit already. The Google developer works for Google... I think they're quite aware of the concept of criticism and being made aware of different points of view. They do not white knights protecting them from Linus' supposedly harsh language (which I never agreed with, I actually always found him quite tame to be truthful, kind of boring actually), they need to take what is being said and use that to improve their own methodology.

                  The goal is important. Not the words used to get to that goal. Substance over form, please.
                  Stating "And be aware that the likelihood that you know what you are doing is basically nil." is basically saying "you're stupid" rather than "you're wrong". It's a message indicating they have nothing useful to contribute.

                  Comment


                  • #59
                    Originally posted by gigaplex View Post
                    Stating "And be aware that the likelihood that you know what you are doing is basically nil." is basically saying "you're stupid" rather than "you're wrong". It's a message indicating they have nothing useful to contribute.
                    I interpreted that line as being more that what the developer was trying to do is something people commonly attempt because the nature of locks are misunderstood, the difficulty in doing it correctly is very high, and that the proper use of spinlocks in user space is so limited in scope most people wouldn't care to use them anyway.

                    Comment


                    • #60
                      Originally posted by tchiwam View Post
                      A bit off topic here ...

                      The mutli cpu systems I have abused, locks are always evil and never behaved as planned.

                      I always hated doing the mutli week investment to work around a lock less solution. But they have always worked faster in the end. The only extra cost was in the memory usage, but that you can just trow money at it.
                      I too have been written many threaded programs (for about the last 25 years or so). Even on 60 fps animating programs, mutexes have worked fine. I think the biggest problem is poorly architected programs with dozens of mutexes floating around, thus greatly increasing the likelihood that a thread will encounter a locked mutex.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X