Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Linux Kernel 2.6.21 Released

Posted by Zonk on 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."

4 of 296 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Bloat? by qbwiz · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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.
    --
    Ewige Blumenkraft.
  2. Re:Bloat? by Lxy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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.

    --

    There is no reasonable defense against an idiot with an agenda
    :wq
  3. Re:Cool, but... by npsimons · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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.


    --
    Nathan's blog
  4. Re:Bloat? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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.