Slashdot Mirror


Linux Kernel 2.6.30 Released

diegocgteleline.es writes "Linux kernel 2.6.30 has been released. The list of new features includes NILFS2 (a new, log-structured filesystem), a filesystem for object-based storage devices called exofs, local caching for NFS, the RDS protocol (which delivers high-performance reliable connections between the servers of a cluster), a new distributed networking filesystem (POHMELFS), automatic flushing of files on renames/truncates in ext3, ext4 and btrfs, preliminary support for the 802.11w drafts, support for the Microblaze architecture, the Tomoyo security MAC, DRM support for the Radeon R6xx/R7xx graphic cards, asynchronous scanning of devices and partitions for faster bootup, the preadv/pwritev syscalls, several new drivers and many other small improvements."

41 of 341 comments (clear)

  1. DRM? by corsec67 · · Score: 3, Informative

    Why would DRM be listed as a "feature"?

    Oh, wrong kind of DRM?

    --
    If I have nothing to hide, don't search me
    1. Re:DRM? by sakdoctor · · Score: 4, Informative

      The Direct Rendering Manager (DRM) is a component of the Direct Rendering Infrastructure, a system to provide efficient video acceleration (especially 3D rendering) on Unix-like operating systems, e.g. Linux, FreeBSD, NetBSD, and OpenBSD.
      It consists of two in-kernel drivers (realized as kernel modules on Linux), a generic drm driver, and another which has specific support for the video hardware. This pair of drivers allows a userspace client direct access to the video hardware.

      I assume it's this. Either that, or linux now has Direct response marketing in the kernel.

    2. Re:DRM? by Stoian+Ivanov · · Score: 4, Informative

      Direct Rendering Managment - this DRM not the bad one

    3. Re:DRM? by mcgrew · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The bad one (not in Linux thankfully) is Dumb Restrictions on Media.

      Also stands for Dinasaurs Require Money.

  2. Re:Sad, but true: by Povno · · Score: 4, Funny

    Balmer... is that you?

    --
    sudo apt-get lost
  3. In related news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Meanwhile back at GNOME H.Q. the developers are still undecided whether to move the "Ok" button on the default help screen 10 pixels to the right. Most think it would be a good idea but a hard core few insist that such a momentous change requires further study as it may confuse new users.

    A new version of the dialogue is expected in 2037.

  4. Re:Sad, but true: by ta+bu+shi+da+yu · · Score: 3, Funny

    Eric Allman might well agree.

    --
    XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
  5. Re:DRM support? In the kernel? by TheGratefulNet · · Score: 4, Informative

    different DRM. this isn't 'rights mgmt' drm.

    sometimes, 3 letters can mean different things.

    --

    --
    "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
  6. POHMEL by dimethylxanthine · · Score: 4, Funny

    Not sure about the story behind naming POHMELFS what it is, but "pohmel'e" in Russian means "hangover". You can only guess...

    1. Re:POHMEL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      And Evgeniy Polyakov (the POHMELFS dev) sounds like a russian name. I guess he knows.

      in soviet russia file systems name hangovers after you

  7. DRM for Trolls by chill · · Score: 4, Informative

    The Direct Rendering Manager (DRM) is a component of the Direct Rendering Infrastructure, a system to provide efficient video acceleration (especially 3D rendering) on Unix-like operating systems, e.g. Linux, FreeBSD, NetBSD, and OpenBSD.

    It consists of two in-kernel drivers (realized as kernel modules on Linux), a generic drm driver, and another which has specific support for the video hardware. This pair of drivers allows a userspace client direct access to the video hardware.

    From WikiPedia.

    Karma Whoring FTW!

    --
    Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
  8. Intel integrated graphics now work properly by zevans · · Score: 5, Informative

    If you're using 2.7.x Intel xorg drivers you NEED this kernel. Anyone struggling with weird freezes, font corruption, and various other troubles - turns out most of these problems weren't in the Intel drivers at all, but in the GEM and DRI code in the kernel. Mine's been rock solid since RC5 for stability, and RC8 finally fixed the problem with fonts under UXA.

    --
    "... and more and more now there are all kinds of electronic goodies available" -- Pink Floyd 1972
  9. Re:DRM support? In the kernel? by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 3, Funny

    Just look at RMS vs. RMS. (One has to wonder if that was intentional...)

  10. Thottle Capability by kenp2002 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Still no support for SLA\95% throttling of processing power allocated to VMs.

    Case in Point:

    VM 1 : 80% Of processor utilization
    VM 2 : 20% of processor utilization
              : Can borrow up to 20% of VM1's allocation
              : if unused.

    The scheduler does great things don't get me wrong but when it comes to provisioning systems for various clients some want a garuntee on the level of processing power that is available at any time. This is true in test systems as well where yout Integration, Acceptance, and Performance virtual environments may share Bare Iron with some production VMs.

    Now this is old hat easy with mainframes (MIP allocation\weights between LPARS\SYSPLEX) but with more and more focus on VMs and hosted VMs SLAs on processing power is becoming more of an issue.

    Nice values are not enough when writing contracts... Great work Linux team but could we get some more granular control over VM provisioning with SLAs in mind? Yeah we can build user space systems to help manage VMs but kernel level provisioning and auditing is something we need with KVM. Gotta have the reports to show the customer you are meeting the agreeded upon SLAs.

    And for my own personal use, I'd love to be able to throttle a dos 6.22 VM to 486 speeds so some of those ancient programs can be ran for historical purposes. (Without bombing the processor with dummy NOP and other MOSLO crap so we keep our power consumption down.)

    Just some musings as Linux rolls along...

    --
    -=[ Who Is John Galt? ]=-
    1. Re:Thottle Capability by kenp2002 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      In large enterprises no, your test environments are still "Production" machines, aka they are mission critical with the expected uptimes. The "test" part of it is what you are running in the system, not the maturity of the iron itself. When a test environment is down that is just as important as the side the consumer sees. The hardware, especially with modern VM infrastructure is all production class. The VMs which the whole point of VMs is to isolate an environment.

      Bare Iron in virtual infrastructure is just a resource now in most enterprises. It has become a Fabric of sorts now with SAN, ISCSI, etc. Along with clustering and failover the model has changed drastically on how hardware and software are managed.

      Virutal Machines have changed the data center and now VMs result in hardware pools and fabrics rather then discrete machines.

      This is important for EOM\EOQ\EOY system activity.

      By establishing high\med\low power fabrics VMs can be shifted as needed based on expected hardware resources.

      During End of Month say at a bank you may transfer all of your test VMs to a low power fabric to allow production to capitalize all the power. As certain development phases come and go you may want to shift which fabric your VM is running on. This is also crucial for testing VM functionality in various LOCATIONs within the network fabric.

      Example
      Before we promote this code to production lets move the ACPT systems to HPERF Pool (where production always exists) to see if traffic is routed correctly (transforming the ACPT environment VMs effectively into a DRESS rehersal envionrment.)

      For performance testing this may be necessary for mid-sized corporation that cannot afford to duplicate their high performance fabric. So we know that given the 3rd week of second quarter the activity on HIPERF1 is at 5% so we can move the ACPT environment to HIPERF1 and run a full load test and reserve the existing HIPERF1 applications 10% (so our load test can pin the system up to 90%).

      That kind of provisioning is a pain in user space but soo damn useful. Same for facility relocation or hardware maintenance. Shutting down MEDPERF1 fabric for hardware maintenance? Shove 50% of the VMs onto HIPERF1 and 50% to LOWPERF1 until maintenance is complete.

      The idea is that if you have a production ANYTHING in a VM then it is usually part of a cluster or pool. If a test VM, or any VM, is capable of bringing down the whole bare iron system then you wouldn't have VMs at all to being with. So if you do have PROD VMs then the risk of another VM dropping the system has already been defined as an acceptable risk.

      This is what is driving the debate with cloud computing and why mainframes still are around. Some things you can virtualize with low risk, some things can live in the cloud, and for everything else there is a mainframe.

      --
      -=[ Who Is John Galt? ]=-
  11. Why another filesystem?! by Psiren · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Can anyone explain to me why Linux has so many filesystems? Windows has had NTFS for years (admittedly, several versions, but never any compatibility issues that I've come across), and Linux has, what, 73 or something?! Is it really that hard to get it right?

    1. Re:Why another filesystem?! by fbjon · · Score: 5, Informative

      This is something quite different and exciting: a log-structured file system, for storing your files on dead trees.

      --
      True confidence comes not from realising you are as good as your peers, but that your peers are as bad as you are.
    2. Re:Why another filesystem?! by harryandthehenderson · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Can anyone explain to me why Linux has so many filesystems?

      Because one filesystem isn't optimal for all cases? Because people want to experiment with new things? Why does it matter?

      Windows has had NTFS for years (admittedly, several versions, but never any compatibility issues that I've come across), and Linux has, what, 73 or something?! Is it really that hard to get it right?

      And Windows has had FAT12, FAT16, FAT32, NTFS, exFAT, VFAT, FFS2, DFS, EFS. Was it really that hard to get it right?

    3. Re:Why another filesystem?! by tick-tock-atona · · Score: 5, Funny

      Can anyone explain to me why Windows has so many viruses? Linux has had no viruses for years (admittedly, several attempts, but never any in the wild that I've come across), and Windows has, what, 73 billion or something?! Is it really that hard to get it right?

    4. Re:Why another filesystem?! by ta+bu+shi+da+yu · · Score: 4, Funny

      Uh... you just got modded as informative. Genius.

      --
      XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
    5. Re:Why another filesystem?! by peppepz · · Score: 5, Funny

      You forgot High Sierra, ISO9660, UDF.

      And WinFS. Oh, wait...

    6. Re:Why another filesystem?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Because one filesystem isn't optimal for all cases?

      The thing is, Linux strives so hard for the "optimum" that, while doing so, they end up in mediocrity. That's because its programmers are so concerned with micro-optimizations and top speed that they lack the ability to design properly and make good abstractions.

      Would it really be that hard to have ONE good fs that you could tune to different use cases? Probably not. But the average Linux coder sees that something isn't fast in case X and goes ahead redoing the entire wheel. And why? Because the thing he just looked at wasn't designed very well either and can't be adapted easily to different use scenarios. And why? Because it was done by a half-assed coder like himself. And so the circle closes.

      Linux needs more people that can properly design software and make good abstractions - instead of narrow-minded code monkeys that can't see beyond their own crap that they are willing to completely rewrite in two revisions anyway because they lost the big picture.

    7. Re:Why another filesystem?! by TheRaven64 · · Score: 4, Informative

      Log-structured filesystems are a new technology

      Haha! This is the kind of wonderful comment I see a lot from Linux users. The first operating system to ship with a log-structured filesystem was the Sprite kernel in 1990. It was rewritten for 4.4BSD, which was released in 1995. Then, 15 years later, suddenly Linux developers hear about it and it's a brand new technology.

      Linux is not the whole world. Most of the 'new' technologies in Linux appeared in other UNIX-like systems first, and many of the implementations in Linux are inferior to the originals (although some are better).

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    8. Re:Why another filesystem?! by leoc · · Score: 4, Funny

      Can anyone explain to me why Ford has so many kinds of cars? Tesla has had a 2 seat roadster for years (admittedly, several versions, but never any compatibility issues that I've come across), and Ford has, what, 73 or something?! Is it really that hard to get it right?

      --
      STFU about slashdot bias.
    9. Re:Why another filesystem?! by EvilNTUser · · Score: 5, Funny

      You just wait. In another ten years, Apple will have invented it!

      --
      My Sig: SEGV
    10. Re:Why another filesystem?! by profplump · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Did you miss the abstraction layer linux already has for file systems -- VFS? The layer that lets all file-related system calls like be unified among all file systems, so that a file system is only responsible for actually talking to the disk? The same sort of system used by BSD and Windows? Doesn't that essentially make new file systems as minimal as possible while still allowing "tuning"?

  12. Re:DRM support? In the kernel? by harryandthehenderson · · Score: 3, Informative
  13. Trusted Computing Slithered In? by Bob9113 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Integrity Management Architecture

    Contributor: IBM

    Recommended LWN article: http://lwn.net/Articles/227937/

    The Trusted Computing Group(TCG) runtime Integrity Measurement Architecture(IMA) maintains a list of hash values of executables and other sensitive system files, as they are read or executed. If an attacker manages to change the contents of an important system file being measured, we can tell. If your system has a TPM chip, then IMA also maintains an aggregate integrity value over this list inside the TPM hardware, so that the TPM can prove to a third party whether or not critical system files have been modified.

    From the recommended article, the key dilemma:

    There are clear advantages to a structure like this. A Linux-based teller machine, say, or a voting machine could ensure that it has not been compromised and prove its integrity to the network. Administrators in charge of web servers can use the integrity code in similar ways. In general, integrity management can be a powerful tool for people who want to be sure that the systems they own (or manage) have not be reconfigured into spam servers when they weren't looking.

    The other side of this coin is that integrity management can be a powerful tool for those who wish to maintain control over systems they do not own. Should it be merged, the kernel will come with the tools needed to create a locked-down system out of the box. As these modules get closer to mainline confusion, we may begin to see more people getting worried about them. Quite a few kernel developers may oppose license terms intended to prevent "tivoization," but that doesn't mean they want to actively support that sort of use of their software. Certainly it would be harder to argue against the shipping of locked-down, Linux-based gadgets when the kernel, itself, provides the lockdown tools.

    OK, maybe this is overdramatic, but trading freedom from third-party oversight through trusted computing for the security of first-party oversight through trusted computing seems a little like:

    "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." - Benjamin Franklin

    But I can see both sides. Pondering... what are your thoughts?

  14. Nice, But... by maz2331 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    If you want a mainframe, maybe calling IBM and ordering one is a better way to go?

  15. Some Great Work...But "rt2500 Realtek Drivers" by mrpacmanjel · · Score: 3, Informative

    Have wireless "issues" been fixed with this release.

    I have a laptop with generic realtek rt2500 wifi hardware.
    For many kernel releases I have to compile seperate drivers (Legacy serialmonkey) because the "stock" drivers are woefully unstable.
    I either lose my connection, painfully slow( have tried the "rate 54" fix) or I cannot reconnect to my network at all.

    I don't mind compiling seperate drivers (a huge benefit of open source stuff & Linux) but I am concerned how long I will be able to do this (E.g. something changes in the kernel makes the "external" driver break - in fact actual development of the legacy drivers has ceased - http://rt2x00.serialmonkey.com/wiki/index.php/Main_Page)?

    I know I should not be moaning about this but this issue has been around for ages and seems to affect a lot of hardware.

    This is my only niggle with Linux and I am grateful for everything. Computing become much more interesting and fun again.

    Huge thanks to Linus and the kernel developers.

  16. Ralink Driver Clarification by Vu1turEMaN · · Score: 5, Informative

    When they say "Support for rt3070 driver for recent RaLink Wi-Fi chipsets", they really mean support for RT2870, RT2770, RT307X, RT3572 chipsets (they're all the same, with just features enabled or disabled, or signal strength improved between them).

    This was the one last thing for me to fully switch over to linux. Netgear and alot of other Wireless-N USB adapters use these chipsets, and they are the best around.

    Previously, the method of installing this driver was the largest pain in the ass I've ever had to go through as a linux noob (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=960642) and I'm so very very glad to see that this chipset is now supported.

    The reason it was so hard is that the normal controlling app for the USB device has many advanced features you normally don't see on a wireless adapter (act as a router, full cisco network compatibility, etc etc).

  17. Re:LINUX IS SHIT by morgan_greywolf · · Score: 3, Interesting

    In Windows, something like this Just Works(tm).

    Not always. I had a USB WiFi adapter that I attempted to install on a Windows laptop and after several attempts at uninstalling and reinstalling the driver, I took it back to the store and got a different model. Probably that WiFi adapter just sucked, but still, just because something "Just Works(tm)" for one OS and one piece of hardware doesn't mean that is always the case.

  18. NILFS2 is better than MILFS2 by Dystopian+Rebel · · Score: 5, Funny

    NILFS2 is the successor to MILFS2, which was based on the "Mother" specification.

    NILFS2 is based on the "Nanny" specification, which means it is younger, firmer, *and* keeps the child nodes quiet when you are not actively updating its data.

    --
    Rich And Stupid is not so bad as Working For Rich And Stupid.
  19. Re:So when's KMS going to happen? by peppepz · · Score: 4, Informative

    No kernel modelsetting in 2.6.30 for anything but Intel chips.

    There is some work in progress for ATI chips, but nothing in the mainline kernel.

    In the meantime you can use uvesafb in the current kernel to get a framebuffer console if you like it. But you will get a bad vt switching experience.

  20. Re:2.8.x kernel soon? by Hatta · · Score: 3, Funny

    They should just drop the 2.8. prefix. Linux 30 sounds much cooler than 2.8.30, and man it's got to be light years ahead of Windows 7!

    --
    Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
  21. Re:2.8.x kernel soon? by Keruo · · Score: 3, Informative

    There's clear roadmap posted here describing features and implications of version numbers.

    --
    There are no atheists when recovering from tape backup.
  22. Re:Sad, but true: by mcgrew · · Score: 5, Funny

    Actually, you COULD use Linux as an OS for a British cigarette vending machine, in which case it WOULD be for fags!

  23. Re:2.8.x kernel soon? by SiChemist · · Score: 5, Funny

    I loved the last item in the roadmap:

    - 2.6.<odd>: still a stable kernel, but accept bigger changes leading up
          to it (timeframe: a month or two).
      - 2.<odd>.x: aim for big changes that may destabilize the kernel for
          several releases (timeframe: a year or two)
      - <odd>.x.x: Linus went crazy, broke absolutely _everything_, and rewrote
          the kernel to be a microkernel using a special message-passing version
          of Visual Basic. (timeframe: "we expect that he will be released from
          the mental institution in a decade or two").

  24. ext4? by Zancarius · · Score: 3, Funny

    Where'd my wife and the extra seat from my car go?

    With Reiser in jail, the only thing you have left is to blame ext4. :)

    Err, excuse me. The application developers.

    --
    He who has no .plan has small finger. ~ Confucius on UNIX
  25. Re:LINUX IS SHIT by Synchis · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Interesting you'd bring up what "Just Works" in windows.

    My wifi card in my home PC doesn't work in windows out of the box, and doesn't have a readily available XP driver. I had to hunt for a generic driver and jump through hoops to get it to work.

    On the other hand, the same wifi card, in the same machine Just Works in Linux. No fuss, no command line, no configuration. Just enter my wep key when prompted.

    In windows, my sound card doesn't work *AT ALL*. Can't find a driver. Not even from the mainboard mfg.

    On the other hand, the same sound card, in the same machine Just Works in Linux.

    Go figure... apparently my system is confused :P

    Or maybe, its you that it confused. Linux now supports more hardware natively than any other operating system in existance. And thanks to projects like the Linux Driver Project, that develops drivers for hardware for companies *FOR FREE*, thats unlikely to change.

    Don't get me wrong, I'm sure windows has a place in this world, but Windows should no longer be allowed to lead the market on the desktop. It's far too dangerous.

    --
    Thomas A. Knight
    Author of The Time Weaver
  26. Re:2.8.x kernel soon? by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 4, Funny

    ... rewrote the kernel to be a microkernel using a special message-passing version of Visual Basic.

    Oh, so that is what GNU/Hurd guys are up to these days!