Linux Kernel 2.6.20 Released

diegocgteleline.es writes "After two months of development, Linux 2.6.20 has been released. This release includes two different virtualization implementations: KVM: full-virtualization capabilities using Intel/AMD virtualization extensions and a paravirtualization implementation usable by different hypervisors. Additionally, 2.6.20 includes PS3 support, a fault injection debugging feature, UDP-lite support, better per-process IO accounting, relative atime, relocatable x86 kernel, some x86 microoptimizations, lockless radix-tree readside, shared pagetables for hugetbl, and many other things. Read the list of changes for more details."

Comments

linux-wlan-ng injection

[sinclair44]

Does anyone know if this fixes packet injection on Prism wireless adapter cards using the linux-wlan-ng driver and the aircrack-ng patch? It's been broken since 2.6.12 (but worked before that)...

kvm versus vmware

[digitalsushi]

VMWare released their server product recently, for free, and it's basically the same thing as VMWare workstation, except workstation is expensive and does slightly less. (So VMWare server is pretty sweet. Check it out if you havent heard of it. We use it to virtualize several windows XP guests on a linux host).

I've looked at a KVM whitepaper and it doesn't look like it's quite stable yet. The paper did however mention that it's usably fast on a current processor. (Given it requires the VT extensions, it's inevitable not to have a current processor!)

Can anyone comment on whether KVM is a reasonable alternative to the VMWare Server product?

Re:kvm versus vmware

[arkhan_jg]

Not yet. I've played with it, and it's basically an alternative to the qemu closed-source module, it's using a modified qemu userland. The advantage of using a VT/SVM capable processor with KVM means you can run an unmodified guest OS; i.e. no paravirtualised custom drivers needed.

Its biggest weakness is speed. VMware have had years of tweaking and finetuning, while kvm is very very new, and slow in certain areas. General desktop is fine, but network speed was painfully bad - for example - when I tried version 10. Plenty of work coming down the pipe, and it looks like it could be a powerful opensource virtualisation tool - in time. Right now, it is a bit fiddly to get running, and not quite ready for a production environment.

For now I'd stick to VMWare or virtualbox, but definitely have another look at KVM in say, 6 months time.

Re:Relocatable on x86?

[pboyd2004]

Among the other things mentioned here. It's actually somewhat of a security thing. A lot of root kits and other exploits rely on fixed addresses so if you move the kernel or other parts of the OS around it's harder to hack.

Re:Relocatable on x86?

[Anonymous Coward]

"Since pointing people to the relevent document is apparently flamebait"

Hint, it's the word "fucking" that made you seem aggressive and earnt you a flamebait moderation. I'm not going to discuss the logic or consistency of this, because there isn't any. Social behaviours are just something you have to learn and live with if you want to interact with others.

Re:Relocatable on x86?

[node 3]

RTFM is only inappropriate when directed at someone who is making a legitimate effort. If a n00b, who is curious about Linux but is not making a "legitimate effort", hears "RTFM" (or "RTFA", in this case), and is put off Linux, possibly forever, is that appropriate?

The thing that made your answer so shitty and arrogant was, while it was clear you were *trying* to be helpful, you wrote a very long, "RTFA", which did not answer the question at all, and even worse, was much longer than an actual, helpful, answer would have been.

Reading your post it sounds as if there is never a situation where it is appropriate to refer someone to the manual at all. Where did you get that idea? I never said anything of the sort.

You've really got to consider how your help is going to be received (if your goal is actually to help, which it's clear it was). If someone asks a question, and you answer with a smart-ass riddle, most of the time all you're doing is annoying the person, and not helping at all. RTFM is a lot like answering with a riddle (although much more straightforward). If their question is really complex, sometimes RTFM is the shorter, easier answer. If they show keen interest, sometimes RTFM is the most helpful answer (pointing them where they can learn much more than just the answer to their single question). And sometimes RTFM teaches people to be self-sufficient.

On the other hand, sometimes RTFM sounds too much like, "I could tell you, but I won't. You're on your own, n00b." Why expect the casual observer to respond well to that?