The Increasing Size Of The Linux Kernel

[Teho]

Linux are using faster filesystem, faster hardware, and still are slower on SAP benchmarks.

This topic has nothing to do with:
1. Solaris
2. Linux Performance
3. Filesystems
4. Hardware
5. SAP benchmarks
So could you please take your trolling elsewhere? Even if Phoronix doesn't strictly moderate these forums it's still part of the good practises and if you ever want people to take you seriously you should start from there. It only makes it worse that this is not the first topic you have terrorized... If you have so much to say about Solaris, create a blog or at least discuss it in its own topic (for example Linux vs. Solaris wars or whatever).

Thank you.

[kebabbert]

I commented on Linus Torvalds saying that Linux is getting bloated, and this article shows that too. Then it escalated. But anyway, is it not true what Linus Torvalds say? Or is he lying?

[Teho]

But anyway, is it not true what Linus Torvalds say? Or is he lying?

It already has been said on this topic, you can't just take things out of context and assume that they support your views. Linux getting larger doesn't necessarily mean it's getting "bloated" and vice versa. The size itself doesn't affect the performance a one bit. The fact that some bits aren't as optimized as they could be in Linux is again out side of this topic's domain.

[kebabbert]

Ok, the discussion continues here:

http://phoronix.com/forums/showthread.php?64939-Linux-vs-Solaris-scalability-etc&p=238508#post238508

[Ex-Cyber]

While many did take the words "bloated" and "huge" out of context, it wasn't an unfair move in this case. It really was a summary of what Linus was saying, and reading the context only reinforces that impression. He says that "our icache footprint is scary" (making the performance connection for anyone who knows anything about modern processors) and generally characterizes bloat as a necessary evil whose presence is the tradeoff for having a featureful kernel.

[mrugiero]

i vote for an AGPLv3 Linux kernel ;-)

and yes 100mb or 2gb doesn't matter.

but maybe its much easier to maintain if its much smaller?

i think there are more arguments for an slim-down.

That's relative. If there is someone who takes care of a driver/group of drivers, then they'll be maintained independently of the core maintaining, so it doesn't make it harder. If the maintainer of that group of drivers just dropped them, then if some change breaks compatibility, they will be dropped. But that's again the case when they get in the way of development.
Anyway, if there is noone willing to make a driver compatible with the changes on the OS, then the user of that driver will see no benefit on updating, so it wouldn't change nothing to him if the driver gets dropped in a future release. In the best case, the bugfixes will be backported to the last supported version, and in the worst, the user can still use the one which worked for him.
The only real problem for the user in that case should be the imposibility or increased difficulty to use a modern distro. But in most cases, modern distros for non tech users are getting fat enough to avoid them with ancient hardware.

[kebabbert]

ZFS is the most advance file system on this planet this is proved multiple times.
....

I will answer here:

http://phoronix.com/forums/showthread.php?64939-Linux-vs-Solaris-scalability-etc