Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

Linux Kernel 2.6.21 Released

Posted by Zonk on Thu Apr 26, 2007 03:36 PM
from the a-long-awaited-penguin dept.
diegocgteleline.es writes "Linus Torvalds has released Linux 2.6.21 after months of development. This release improves the virtualization with VMI, a paravirtualization interface that will be used by Vmware. KVM does get initial paravirtualization support along with live migration and host suspend/resume support. 2.6.21 also gets a tickless idle loop mechanism called 'Dynticks', built in top of 'clockevents', another feature that unifies the timer handling and brings true high-resolution timers. Other features are: bigger kernel parameter-line, support for the PA SEMI PWRficient CPU and for the Cell-based 'celleb' Toshiba architecture, NFS IPv6 support, IPv4 IPv6 IPSEC tunneling, UFS2 write, kprobes for PPC32, kexec and oprofile for ARM, public key encryption for ecryptfs, Fcrypt and Camilla cipher algorithms, NAT port randomization, audit lockdown mode, some new drivers and many other small improvements."
+ -
story
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • And I just upgraded to 2.6.20-15! (Kubuntu Feisty Fawn)

  • Meh (Score:3, Informative)

    by 1010110010 (1002553) on Thursday April 26 2007, @03:47PM (#18890815)
    I haven't been able to get anything past 2.6.17 to boot successfully, I think they seriously hosed the ATA shit.
    • Re:Meh (Score:4, Interesting)

      by FudRucker (866063) on Thursday April 26 2007, @03:51PM (#18890889)
      personally i hate using an initrd.img and prefer to build ext2 & ext3 support right in the kernel making initrd unnecessary, if you compile file system support as a module you will need an initrd.img too so insetead of selecting an "M" select "*" you could try that...

      P.S. i never use reiserfs so i can not say if this works with reiserfs or not...
      • Re:Meh (Score:4, Interesting)

        by tinkertim (918832) * on Thursday April 26 2007, @11:09PM (#18895989) Homepage

        personally i hate using an initrd.img and prefer to build ext2 & ext3 support right in the kernel making initrd unnecessary, if you compile file system support as a module you will need an initrd.img too so insetead of selecting an "M" select "*" you could try that...


        Its not just the file system you need, its the ability to spin the drive containing said file system too :) Its legacy HW that's getting fuzzy , not file systems. Not really sure why you hate initrds so much?

        The initrd does many more things than load drivers. What if you have an AoE based storage network with many disk-less stations needing to use an OCFS2 single system image? Initrd's can do neat things besides loading modules, have a look at linuxrc. You can bring network adapters to an up/link state, negotiate iscsi targets, download a boot config from a resource controller, all kinds of goodies. Complex networks need to do lots of things before pivot_root gets called, and we need complex networks.

        piix hasn't been 'quite right' since 2.6.16.29 on most of the legacy servers using PATA (IDE) I still have up and working, many of us have been having a difficult time with it. But progress is progress, and this is good progress so I guess my move to all SAS will be sooner than later.

    • Re:Meh (Score:4, Informative)

      by elFarto the 2nd (709099) on Thursday April 26 2007, @04:30PM (#18891585)

      IIRC after 2.6.17 the SATA stuff changed quite a bit (it changed from the old SCSI based stuff, to libata), and requires turning the new options on.

      Regards
      elFarto
      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        My feisty has a 35% chance of mounting correctly the swap and ntfs partitions. On other occasions it boots ok, most of the times displays error and I have to reboot. I have the ext3 and swap partitions on PATA disk and ntfs on a SATA. Anyone else experienced that?

        I also notice the new feisty to be much faster, but when under load, desktop slows down considerably. On edgy, however hard you loaded the machine, there was always the extra power for sth else if you wanted.

        Feisty looks feels like a windows machin
      • Just tried the latest kernel and it hangs on trying to fire up the second ATA instance. Not even a kernel oops, nothing. That's true whether I use the vanilla kernel or Red Hat's RPM. Something is screwed up, and from the sounds of it, there's more than one of us experiencing a failure at the same point, so that would be the obvious suspect.

        This problem needs to go to lkml, and cc Andrew.
  • KVM management? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by drinkypoo (153816) <martin.espinoza@gmail.com> on Thursday April 26 2007, @03:48PM (#18890837) Homepage Journal
    Speaking of KVM (slightly offtopic, but not totally) are there any worthwhile management utilities for it yet? I actually ended up giving up for a while on KVM entirely because the video device is horribly slow and VDE support is not reliable, and I'm using vmware server, but I did have to give it a try. I'd love to use KVM (since I have supported hardware and it's Free software, and I'd love to minimize my use of the closed stuff) but beyond those problems (which will hopefully both be fixed relatively soon) there is simply no decent management software unless you're on redhate. Either virt-manager or libvirt is badly broken and won't work properly otherwise. UNLESS... has anyone out there gotten it working on debian/Ubuntu yet? I tried for a while, but I'm just not a good enough programmer and the programs ain't done yet.
      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        Uh, Synergy is a program used for sharing a keyboard and mouse across multiple machines. I use it daily, with a Linux host, and two clients; one Windows XP, one Mac OSX. It doesn't manage settings and run state for KVM virtual machines. Thanks for playing, though.
  • by MarcQuadra (129430) * on Thursday April 26 2007, @03:48PM (#18890841) Journal
    I follow prerelease kernels and I've been waiting for this. I've found that running my VMWare hosts and guests with tickless, low-HZ, voluntary-preempted kernels is seriously reducing the overhead you get when you run more virtual CPUs than real ones in your box.

    I can't wait for it to mature on PPC, MIPS, and x86_64! Right now it's 32-bit x86 only.
      • It means that they were able to successfully remove the blood sucking parasites from the kernel.

        Most kernels use a periodic system timer tick to do various housekeeping chores, like rescheduling tasks, sending packets, flushing files from the cache, etc. Usually this occurs at some periodic rate, i.e. every 1-10ms for Linux and every 10-15ms for Windows (according to this article [microsoft.com].

        This is a bit wasteful of CPU resources, since the kernel might not need to do anything for quite a while, or it might want a high resolution timer with higher accuracy than normal system timer. For example, when the system is idle, the CPU still must wake up and process a timer interrupt for every timer tick, and if it's set to 1ms there are 1000 interrupts per second.

        A tickless kernel instead only schedules the next tick for when it is needed, so if the system is idle and nothing needs to happen for 50ms, then the next tick will be scheduled 50ms later. On the other hand, if a timer needs to go off in 750 microseconds, the kernel can schedule the next interrupt to go off then, giving much higher accuracy.
          • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

            sleep(5) currently sleeps for 5 seconds, however, calls like nanosleep should have much greater accuracy with a tickless timer.
  • by rob1980 (941751) on Thursday April 26 2007, @03:49PM (#18890843)
    ... but does it run Linux?
  • by iamacat (583406) on Thursday April 26 2007, @03:49PM (#18890853)
    Once again, it took many months of work to optimize an idle loop.
  • by diegocgteleline.es (653730) on Thursday April 26 2007, @03:50PM (#18890875)
    Here. [kernelnewbies.org]
  • by heretic108 (454817) on Thursday April 26 2007, @03:57PM (#18890997)
    Sooner or later, my /boot/grub/menu.lst will look like:

    ...
    title Ubuntu, kernel 2.6.29-5-generic
    root (hd0,0)
    kernel /boot/vmlinuz-2.6.29-5-generic root=/dev/hda1 ro \
      coffee=cappucino,sugar=0,hourly \
      massageareas=head,neck,shoulders \
      catfeedingtimes=4_hours,15_grams
    initrd /boot/initrd.img-2.6.29-5-generic
    quiet
    savedef ault
    boot
    ...
    • by ctr2sprt (574731) on Thursday April 26 2007, @04:29PM (#18891549)

      Yeah, the absurdly long kernel command lines in Linux really bug me. It's a symptom of the suckiness that is the PC BIOS, so I'm not really blaming the Linux people, but there are better solutions and have been for years. The FreeBSD loader [freebsd.org], for instance, is capable of loading the kernel and any modules required to bootstrap the system, reading configuration files, and running Forth (!) scripts. Such a loader would completely eliminate the need for initrds on nearly all systems[1] without sacrificing any power. You could also emulate Openboot or EFI - or more realistically a subset of them - using the PC BIOS to prepare for the future.

      [1] initrd is a really awesome feature and it shouldn't go away. But it's massive overkill the way it's typically used, which is to load modules required to mount the root filesystem.

    • catfeedingtimes=4_hours,15_grams

      you forgot the
      type=feline_supplement,id=25

  • Mactel MBP C2D (Score:4, Interesting)

    by JumboMessiah (316083) on Thursday April 26 2007, @04:02PM (#18891097)
    As an owner of a Macbook Pro, I've been waiting for this to get released. The Dynticks integration will (hopefully) help lower power consumption and heat output. Though this will help reduce heat and power on all platforms, those running Linux on a MBP C2D know it's hard to keep the fans from spinning up from relatively little activity.

    Next up is to get ATI to actually support any power saving features in fglrx on the MBP C2D and give the mAdWiFi [madwifi.org] guys more time to work out the features on the Atheros AR5008.

    OSX, right now, still has a significant advantage in keeping heat and power consumption down. Even though, I imagine some will testify that even OSX is having a hard time with it...

    Here's to testing out 2.6.21 tonight :)
      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        I'm a Linux guy since 0.12. I really, really, really want a Linux laptop that works. I settled for a Unix laptop that works.

        The MacBook was $1300 and features DVD RW, firewire, USB, bluetooth, wifi, a video camera, audio (record and play), a 3d graphics card and a 150 minute battery (for the way I use it). The coolest features are the little things that Apple did right: the magnetic power cord, the simple, sturdy case, the pulsing standby indicator, etc. I install the GNU bits that I need, but most of
  • Cool, but... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by asninn (1071320) on Thursday April 26 2007, @04:14PM (#18891285)
    That's cool, but is this really news that's Slashdot-worthy? Sites like LWN and KernelTrap have already reported this, and anyone who's interested in Linux development is pretty much guaranteed to follow the former at least, I think (and most likely the latter as well).
    • That's cool, but is this really news that's Slashdot-worthy? Sites like LWN and KernelTrap have already reported this, and anyone who's interested in Linux development is pretty much guaranteed to follow the former at least, I think (and most likely the latter as well).

      Considering that slashdot was (note the past tense) first and foremost a Linux/all things geeky site, I'd say this article is very slashdot-worthy. Not to mention that we get a fawning mac fan boy article every time Steve Jobs so much as farts. At least the Apple section can be turned off. Wish I could do the same with Microsoft and Windows articles.


  • eCryptfs public key (Score:5, Interesting)

    by omnirealm (244599) on Thursday April 26 2007, @04:57PM (#18891937) Homepage
    The public key support for eCryptfs can handle more than just public keys. It includes a communication mechanism with a user daemon that can be queried from the kernel on file open events. There is a pluggable key module interface accessible through that daemon. OpenSSL is currently implemented, but there is nothing stopping anyone from writing a module to use GnuPG or any other key management/encryption backend, all in userspace. The module just needs to accept a key signature, and it can perform encryption and decryption based on whatever that signature refers to.

    In other news, eCryptfs has recently been given the go-ahead for inclusion into Fedora:

    https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi? id=218556 [redhat.com]

    In the meantime, you can grab all the userspace stuff from the eCryptfs SourceForge site:

    http://ecryptfs.sourceforge.net/ [sourceforge.net]
    • Re:Bloat? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by qbwiz (87077) * <john@ba u m a n f a m ily.com> on Thursday April 26 2007, @03:50PM (#18890873) Homepage

      most distros are going to include a kernel with the kitchen sink compiled in.

      No, most distros are going to include a kernel with the kitchen sink compiled as modules, taking up a few megabytes on the hard drive, but never loaded.
      • Re:Bloat? (Score:4, Insightful)

        by arth1 (260657) on Thursday April 26 2007, @04:34PM (#18891633) Homepage Journal
        Even if you compile something as modules, it does take up memory and resources. Much less, but still not negligible. There's hooks for the modules, plus tests in other parts on whether a module is loaded or not, in addition to much larger symbol tables.
        And, of course, there's many parts that can not be made into modules at all, but have to be part of the kernel. And that makes a HUGE difference.

        Is the difference really that big? Well, the machine I'm currently on has a bzipped kernel that's around 1.5 MB in size plus a 820 kB map. The alternative boot to a commercial distro (no name, no shame) has a bzipped kernel that's around 2.1 MB, plus a 2.3 MB initrd, plus a 1.2 MB System map.

        The difference might not be staggering, but it's there, and the kernel is growing with each revision. Here's how the System.map has grown for the last few revision on this laptop, with no new options added:


        -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 754620 Nov 30 18:32 System.map-2.6.17-gentoo-r8
        -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 768275 Dec 28 15:57 System.map-2.6.18-gentoo-r6
        -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 809157 Mar 26 04:28 System.map-2.6.19-gentoo-r5
        -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 839371 Apr 25 22:45 System.map-2.6.20-gentoo-r6


        That's an 11% increase without adding anything. Similar for the kernel itself (although that's harder to compare directly, due to the bzip2 compression). While not alarming, it's a trend towards feeping creaturitis that I think bears watching.
        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          Pray tell, how did you eliminate the possibility of existing components growing, in order to conclude modularity itself is the problem?
            • Re:Bloat? (Score:4, Insightful)

              by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 26 2007, @07:19PM (#18893679)
              2.6 and recent kernels in general are aimed at *modern computers*. Modern computers that have a *lot* more features and devices than ever before. There is absolutely no comparison to kernels back in the floppy days. If you're still using floppies you might as well be using an old kernel for whatever weathered machine you're talking about. And a microkernel's not going to reduce the overall amount of code, just push it around.

              Not to mention that people who are using Linux for embedded work can still rip out a ton of stuff. You can completely omit module support and all sorts of things that contribute to so-called "bloat." The kernel is still and always has been very flexible about compiling in features, and all the code's there to mess with...

              Small, fast, full of features; pick two. I think.
        • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

          Are people really seriously concerned about this?? Maybe its me but I dont boot my linux (or windows) systems daily, or even monthly. The flexibility that modules give me, more than outways shaving 3 seconds off the boot time...
                • Linux has amazing hibernation support. I use some software called Suspend2 on my laptop, and it works like a charm. It was a little difficult to get it going the first time, but now that it's installed I find it very fast and reliable. It doesn't even require any special support from the hardware!
    • Re:Bloat? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Lxy (80823) on Thursday April 26 2007, @03:52PM (#18890907) Journal
      I've noticed that each time I compile a new kernel, something has been moved to [deprecated] status that was still live in the last release. All the deprecated stuff is not compiled in by default, keeping the resulting bzImage size manageable.

      Most distros compile everything as modules, which generally keeps the overall size of the kernel down. Sure, bzImage grows over time (not just because of new features, but typically new patches == more lines of code), but not significantly from release to release.

      Most "non-uber-geek" users don't care what's in their kernel, and if they did, they'd learn to compile it themselves. Compiling kernels has gotten easier over the years. Chances are, if you care enough about how your kernel is compiled, you'll have the skills needed to do it yourself.
        • Are you referring to the 2.4 days as actual compile time or time it took you to work out what to include in the kernel config? I don't think it ever took more than 8 hours to configure and compile a new kernel on my end even if the machine doing the compiling was 1/10th the speed of, then, current computers.

          Plus, I don't find it THAT hard to configure the new kernels but I take my distro's config file and remove anything I know I don't need rather than starting with a blank-slate config and THEN trying t
    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      and most distros are going to include a kernel with the kitchen sink compiled in.

      Actually, they use kernels with everything compiled as modules, and a separate initrd/initramfs to deal with loading the drivers required at boot time.
      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        I've almost decided that the computer programming age, as an affordable hobby for the non-specialist, is nearing the end of its lifetime. In a few more years you'll have the option of working with entirely standardized/commoditized/completely controlled (corporate DRM style) equipment or, if that doesn't appeal to you, then you'll have to go off a polar deep end and spend absolute bricktons of time and money assembling a system using a soldering iron, a breadboard, and specialty chips ordered from remote cl
        • Re:Bloat? (Score:4, Insightful)

          by shish (588640) on Thursday April 26 2007, @08:17PM (#18894247) Homepage

          I don't see this becoming a reality unless the US Government mandates it through legislation

          The common sense of the US Government is the only thing standing between us and DRM hell? Oh dear :(

    • You joke, (Score:5, Interesting)

      by StarKruzr (74642) on Thursday April 26 2007, @03:53PM (#18890931) Journal
      but I wonder if we're ever going to see 2.8 at this rate. The current kernel revision is MILES away in technology from 2.6.0. What will it take to move to 2.8, or (dare I say it?) 3.0? What qualifies as a major enough change?
      • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 26 2007, @04:07PM (#18891187)

        I wonder if we're ever going to see 2.8 at this rate

        Linux 2.8 will compete with SunOS 6.0 as the best platform for running Duke Nukem Forever.

        • Linux 2.8 will compete with SunOS 6.0 as the best platform for running Duke Nukem Forever.


          I dunno. Hurd will probably give them both a run for their money.

          Anyway, isn't Duke Nukem Forever written in Perl 6?
      • Re:You joke, (Score:4, Insightful)

        by hypnagogue (700024) on Thursday April 26 2007, @04:37PM (#18891673)
        A change to the ABI.

        Oh, sorry, I didn't realize it was a rhetorical question.
                • Language (Score:3, Interesting)

                  does not an arbiter of a versioning system make. :p

                  More things have changed between 2.6.0 and 2.6.21 than changed between 2.0 and 2.2.

                  How's that?
    • by diegocgteleline.es (653730) on Thursday April 26 2007, @03:56PM (#18890985)
      You're confusing Linux with this Windows 95/98 [microsoft.com]. However, this problem [microsoft.com] or this another problem [microsoft.com] are even more funnier
    • by Tom (822) on Thursday April 26 2007, @04:32PM (#18891611) Homepage Journal
      It doesn't and never did. However, the uptime clock wraps around after 497 days. Took me two hours of finding out why the box rebooted (and then why there was no indication of the reboot in the logs) one day to research that. That same box has since looped the clock a second time. So I can say for sure it stays up for more than 50 days. :-)
      • 497 day wrap around? You should switch to Windows. I'm sure no such problem has ever been reported on that OS.
      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        It doesn't and never did. However, the uptime clock wraps around after 497 days.
        I guess that one got fixed at some point:

        [root@blade1 ~]$ uptime
        18:00:25 up 622 days, 23:00, 1 user, load average: 0.17, 0.22, 0.29
        [root@blade1 ~]$ uname -a
        Linux blade1.[redacted] 2.6.9-11.ELsmp #1 SMP Wed Jun 8 17:54:20 CDT 2005 i686 i686 i386 GNU/Linux
    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      As far as I know, Linux never had a 49.7 day problem, but it did have a problem at 497 days. I have a machine at home running the 2.4.20 kernel and every 497 days my uptime restarts, but it hasn't crashed. It's gone through 2 rollovers so far and has been up for over 3.72 years. It will hit its next rollover around September. I really need to build a new server... I just don't know if it will be as reliable as this one has been.
    • Re:Published? (Score:4, Informative)

      by diegocgteleline.es (653730) on Thursday April 26 2007, @04:06PM (#18891177)
      It's me who sent the headline. "Publicar" (to publish) is what people usually uses for those cases in spanish. So there you've the answer for your question :)

      (I also planned to add the number of months of development (almost 3, 80 days), but I forgot it)
    • by mangu (126918) on Thursday April 26 2007, @05:57PM (#18892697)
      people could come in and replace the Linux kernel with BSD, Darwin, or Solaris and I probably wouldn't notice.


      This means your CPU is much more powerful than what you really need. I used FreeBSD a bit in the 1990s, but switched to Linux because the kernel allowed me better fine tuning in the 486 CPU I had at the time.


      Today the CPU is way over my needs too, but I stick to Linux because, first, I have no need to switch and, second, Linux has better hardware support than the others you mentioned.

    • by Grishnakh (216268) on Thursday April 26 2007, @06:17PM (#18892919)
      It doesn't work that way outside of x86-land. As another responder said, the PWRficient isn't just a CPU, it's a SoC (System on Chip). To compare to an x86 system, that would be like having a low-power CPU, north bridge, south bridge, SATA controller, ethernet controller (but not PHY), memory controller, I2C interface, USB controller, interrupt controller, etc. all wrapped up on one chip. This is quite common in the embedded world, where most PPCs are used these days (I'm working on one myself in my day job).

      Since each SoC is totally different, except maybe for the CPU core, porting Linux (or any OS) to it is a little more difficult than just compiling it and loading it. Check out the arch/ppc or arch/arm directories for examples of all the different chips supported. While the work certainly isn't comparable to, say, porting Linux to an entirely different CPU architecture, it does require several new files with custom code to support things like the way interrupts are assigned to the specific functions on the SoC.

      Worse, sometimes new drivers need to be written for certain on-chip peripherals, because some bonehead empire-building managers at the chipmaker wanted to justify a higher budget for their department by, instead of just re-using an existing USB controller or Ethernet controller design and plopping that onto the chip, putting together a whole team and spending months creating a new controller because it might improve performance by a whopping 5%. My last company, which made a lot of ARM-based chips, was especially guilty of this.