Linux-kernel mailing list archive 1999-23,: Re: 2.2.x instabilities

# Re: 2.2.x instabilities

Chuck Lever (cel@monkey.org)
Mon, 7 Jun 1999 14:22:31 -0400 (EDT)

- Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
- Next message: H. Peter Anvin: "Re: [RFC] new bus architecture (+ byte-endianess)"
- Previous message: Martin Mares: "Re: RFC: Devices, buses and hotplug"

On Sat, 5 Jun 1999, ron flory wrote:
> Alan Cox wrote:
> > Though if you want maximum stability you should not be running a
> > -ac patch.
>
> Agreed, understood, and accepted. Your ac-patches often have tweaks
> for the problems we're seeing, so they are eagerly and thankfully
> received whenever posted.

this concerns me a little bit. the AC patches are a way of testing new
and useful stuff as well as making certain bug fixes widely available.
however, the large fdset patch is still in the AC kernels, but not in the
mainstream kernels. this means that any large site is stuck in a
quandary, should they need to run a kernel that supports large fdsets --
they need to run AC kernels, but AC kernels are not meant for production.

so:

1. when can we expect the large fdset support in the mainstream kernel?

2. if not soon, can the large fdset support be split into a separate
patch so that large production sites don't have to run potentially
dangerous kernels to get large fdset support?

- Chuck Lever

    --
    corporate:	<chuckl@netscape.com>
    personal:	<chucklever@netscape.net> or <cel@monkey.org>

    The Linux Scalability project:
    	http://www.citi.umich.edu/projects/linux-scalability/

    -
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
    Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

- Next message: H. Peter Anvin: "Re: [RFC] new bus architecture (+ byte-endianess)"
- Previous message: Martin Mares: "Re: RFC: Devices, buses and hotplug"