Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive


Forgot your password?

Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!

  • View

  • Discuss

  • Share

We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).

Operating Systems Upgrades Linux

Linux 3.0 Will Be Faster Than 2.6.39 179

Posted by timothy
from the phrase-in-person-hours-saved dept.
sfcrazy writes "While we were thinking that the announcement of 3.x branch was nothing more than Linus' mood swing, it seems there is more to it. Linus wrote on the Linux Kernel Mailing List, '3.0 will still be noticeably faster than 2.6.39 due to the other changes made (ie the read-ahead), so yes, the regression itself is fixed.'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Linux 3.0 Will Be Faster Than 2.6.39

Comments Filter:
  • Faster? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by ZombieBraintrust (1685608) on Friday June 24, 2011 @07:01PM (#36561920)
    What does faster mean? What will be faster? Are they talking huge Linux servers or Linux Desktops? Latency? User Interface?
    • Obviously it means that Javascript will execute faster! Javascript is the alpha and the omega!
    • ... Linux on servers has been screwed since the terrible ext3 regression around 2.6.25 ... ;-)
    • Faster Linux adption, of course! :)

  • Linus earlier said that there is no major change in this release. This version comes with the usual two thirds driver changes, and a lot of random fixes.

    please tell me he isn't thinking about adopting firefox and chrome's release model...
    in all seriousness, it still looks like this is more of a rumor than anything that is going to be done for a while.

    • Re:linux 3.0 (Score:4, Informative)

      by Kufat (563166) <kufat@ku f a t . net> on Friday June 24, 2011 @07:09PM (#36562016) Homepage

      They're currently on 3.0 RC4. [] So I imagine that what will and won't be in the release has pretty much solidified by this point.

    • by billcopc (196330)

      To be fair, they've been introducing some pretty big changes in 2.6.38 and 39, enough that I am reluctant to upgrade from 2.6.36 on any servers because it's just been changing TOO quickly and I'm afraid of new bugs.

    • by shaitand (626655)

      It marks the 20th anniversary of Linux. It really isn't that hard to understand wanting a major release to mark it.

    • by Kjella (173770)

      The kernel has long been on a quarterly release schedule. One month merge window, two months of weekly RCs. If Linus is feeling very generous maybe you can sneak into rc1 or rc2 but don't count on it. So every feature is known roughly two months before release, unless it's backed out because it causes too many regressions. So it's actually Firefox that is changing to releases every 3 months, even though they call them 4, 5, 6, 7 while the kernel will be 3.0, 3.1, 3.2, 3.3... just like they've been 2.6.35, 3

  • prefetch() (Score:5, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 24, 2011 @07:10PM (#36562022)

    According to LWN article about removing prefetch [], the linux kernel 3.0.0 will have a bunch of prefetch() calls removed from the kernel.

    Apparently they were supposed to provide hints to the CPU to prefetch the next item in linked lists, but the hardware does a superior job of it without the hints. Especially in the case of the next item being NULL, which was the majority of the cases.

    A very small speedup to be sure, but it's not like there are many low hanging huge wins left.

  • Obviously (Score:4, Funny)

    by vga_init (589198) on Friday June 24, 2011 @08:06PM (#36562680) Journal

    What with the shorter version number, the kernel should now load faster, use less memory, and execute more quickly.

    • by shaitand (626655)

      Totally, every single time a system call that returns the version string is run it will load faster, use less memory, and execute more quickly!

  • LFW (Score:3, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 25, 2011 @05:29AM (#36566114)

    What about LINUX 3.11 for Workgroups ?

If a 6600 used paper tape instead of core memory, it would use up tape at about 30 miles/second. -- Grishman, Assembly Language Programming