Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Linux 3.18 Released, Lockup Bug Still Present

Posted by samzenpus on from the check-it-out dept.

jones_supa writes As anticipated, Linus Torvalds officially released Linux 3.18. The new version is now out there, though that nasty lockup issue has still yet to be resolved. Dave Jones is nearing the end of dissecting the issue, but since it also affects Linux 3.17 and not too many people seem to get hit by the lockups, Linus Torvalds decided to go ahead and do the 3.18 release on schedule. Linus was also concerned that dragging out the 3.18 release would then complicate the Linux 3.19 merge window due to the holidays later this month. Now the Linux 3.19 kernel merge window is open for two weeks of exciting changes.

106 comments

  1. Anyone know what hardware the lockup bug is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    present on?

    I'm curious to know if it is merely glitchy hardware, sloppy coding, or a sign of something more malicious.

    1. Re:Anyone know what hardware the lockup bug is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      systemd. So the latter two.

    2. Re:Anyone know what hardware the lockup bug is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      My understanding is that they are still trying to narrow it down, but in the process have actually found multiple bugs.

    3. Re:Anyone know what hardware the lockup bug is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

      How dare you suggest that there are bugs in the Linux kernel.

      That's blasphemy.

    4. Re:Anyone know what hardware the lockup bug is... by armanox · · Score: 1

      I've had either this or something similar appear on my AMD box at home (FX-8120, 16GB RAM, 990FX Chipset).

      --
      I'm starting to think GNU is the problem with "GNU/Linux" these days.
    5. Re:Anyone know what hardware the lockup bug is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      lol - the 'many eyes' that can examine the source code are only of use when they are actually looking at it.

    6. Re:Anyone know what hardware the lockup bug is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      Bug happens on some special hw when one runs trinity (a system call fuzzer) long enough. So what? I have been running 3.18 from the start of its merge window and have not seen any problems in it. Instead of sensational click bait article from phoronix, I would rather see a link to kernel newbies or lwn with description what has been changed in this version and what is new.

    7. Re:Anyone know what hardware the lockup bug is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And, when they are actually experts in the area where the problem is. Apparently this bug has been known for awhile and nobody knows how to fix it (possibly because they are having trouble reproducing it with a debugger attached; it may be timing dependent - those suck) yet.

    8. Re:Anyone know what hardware the lockup bug is... by chmod+a+x+mojo · · Score: 1

      Hmmm, that's interesting... pretty sure the original bug filer was using an AMD quad core since several mails had been about core 3 / core 4 being idle at the time of crash. I may be wrong though, I only read through it at the time it was posted on /.

      Makes you wonder if it is a AMD multiple of 4 core bug somehow though, and maybe fixable through microcode patching.

      --
      To err is human; effective mayhem requires the root password!
    9. Re:Anyone know what hardware the lockup bug is... by Cley+Faye · · Score: 1

      No problem, he's not saying there are bugs in the Linux kernel. He's saying there were bugs in the Linux kernel.

    10. Re:Anyone know what hardware the lockup bug is... by jones_supa · · Score: 1

      Guys, do you ever read LKML where this stuff happens? Your GP comment said that they have found multiple bugs. No, they haven't. They are dealing with the very same bug where the watchdog detects a soft lockup. There is no debugger attached at this point, they are just doing bisecting (another powerful tool of course) to find what was the specific patch that introduced the bug. Browse through the LKML archive and search for the subject "frequent lockups in 3.18rc4".

    11. Re:Anyone know what hardware the lockup bug is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Even bisecting is hard in this case. Bisecting is an effective way of finding a problem when you know that it's in version Y, but not in version X.

      In this case, it appears that the problem started when the test suite was changed to make it even harder on the system (increased the number of running processes (loadavg) to 256).

      One of the hypothesis's is (or was a couple of days ago, at least) that nothing locks up, something is simply too slow, and doing "something" 256 times in a row can take the 22 seconds that have been reported.

    12. Re:Anyone know what hardware the lockup bug is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A report of this(?) on intel hw:
      http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/1845987

    13. Re:Anyone know what hardware the lockup bug is... by flok · · Score: 1

      I can reproduce it in half an hour on my dell alienware laptop by running my chess program. So no special hardware, no special software.

      --

      www.vanheusden.com - home of Multitail, HTTPing, CoffeeSaint, EntropyBroker, rsstail, bsod, listener, nagcon, nagi
  2. Frist post by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

    ya!

  3. First post form affected system by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No lockup yet on my affected system... crap... nvm... just locked up

    Kernel panic - not syncing: Watchdog detected hard LOCKUP on cpu 3
    CPU: 3 PID: 17176 Comm: trinity-c95 Not tainted 3.17.0+ #87
    0000000000000000 00000000f3a61725 ffff880244606bf0 ffffffff9583e9fa
    ffffffff95c67918 ffff880244606c78 ffffffff9583bcc0 0000000000000010
    ffff880244606c88 ffff880244606c20 00000000f3a61725 0000000000000000
    Call Trace:
      [] dump_stack+0x4e/0x7a
    [] panic+0xd4/0x207
    [] watchdog_overflow_callback+0x118/0x120
    [] __perf_event_overflow+0xae/0x340
    [] ? perf_event_task_disable+0xa0/0xa0
    [] ? x86_perf_event_set_period+0xbf/0x150
    [] perf_event_overflow+0x14/0x20
    [] intel_pmu_handle_irq+0x206/0x410
    [] perf_event_nmi_handler+0x2b/0x50
    [] nmi_handle+0xd2/0x390
    [] ? nmi_handle+0x5/0x390
    [] ? _raw_spin_lock_irqsave+0x80/0x90
    [] default_do_nmi+0x72/0x1c0
    [] do_nmi+0xb8/0x100
    [] end_repeat_nmi+0x1e/0x2e
    [] ? _raw_spin_lock_irqsave+0x80/0x90
    [] ? _raw_spin_lock_irqsave+0x80/0x90
    [] ? _raw_spin_lock_irqsave+0x80/0x90
    > [] lock_hrtimer_base.isra.18+0x25/0x50
    [] hrtimer_try_to_cancel+0x33/0x1f0
    [] hrtimer_cancel+0x1a/0x30
    [] tick_nohz_restart+0x17/0x90
    [] __tick_nohz_full_check+0xc3/0x100
    [] nohz_full_kick_work_func+0xe/0x10
    [] irq_work_run_list+0x44/0x70
    [] irq_work_run+0x2a/0x50
    [] update_process_times+0x5b/0x70
    [] tick_sched_handle.isra.20+0x25/0x60
    [] tick_sched_timer+0x41/0x60
    [] __run_hrtimer+0x81/0x480
    [] ? tick_sched_do_timer+0xb0/0xb0
    [] hrtimer_interrupt+0x117/0x270
    [] local_apic_timer_interrupt+0x37/0x60
    [] smp_apic_timer_interrupt+0x3f/0x50
    [] apic_timer_interrupt+0x6f/0x80
      [] ? lock_release_holdtime.part.28+0x9a/0x160
    [] ? rcu_is_watching+0x27/0x60
    [] kill_pid_info+0xf5/0x130
    [] ? kill_pid_info+0x5/0x130
    [] SYSC_kill+0x103/0x330
    [] ? SYSC_kill+0xac/0x330
    [] ? context_tracking_user_exit+0x52/0x1a0
    [] ? trace_hardirqs_on_caller+0x16d/0x210
    [] ? trace_hardirqs_on+0xd/0x10
    [] ? syscall_trace_enter+0x14d/0x330
    [] SyS_kill+0xe/0x10
    [] tracesys+0xdd/0xe2
    Kernel Offset: 0x14000000 from 0xffffffff81000000 (relocation range: 0xffffffff80000000-0xffffffffbfffffff)

  4. Time to upgrade to Windows? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yes!

    1. Re:Time to upgrade to Windows? by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 0

      We don't need no stinkin' Windows! Get a Mac!

    2. Re:Time to upgrade to Windows? by Opportunist · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Well, Linux Users will probably have to learn a lesson from the Windows User community: When the current version sucks, just use an earlier version and ride it out 'til a new and hopefully better one arrives.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    3. Re:Time to upgrade to Windows? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Please, never user a Mac.
      On desktop, Linux for work, Windows for entertainment.
      On servers use Linux, and let the Mac for those idiots that think they think different for using a overpriced closed and unstable system (OSX crashes more than Windows, since due to the way OSX is coded it is trivial to write a program that can block the whole OS and require a hard reboot, eg: by forcing a system deadlock, which lots of sloppy coded Mac apps suffer from, something that you cannot do in Windows, the only way I've seen modern Windows crashing was due to device driver bugs. )

    4. Re:Time to upgrade to Windows? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You sound like you have never used Mac before. I understand that because of the price you could not afford to own one yet so far. Good luck in the future.

    5. Re:Time to upgrade to Windows? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've been through two recent major os x upgrades, i've been using this laptop for 2 years and I have not crashed once. What am I doing wrong? Restarts and batteries going flat, -of course that happens but, crashing? Nope.

      See, if i think i think different and you claim to think otherwise, then I do think different at least from you. Now I don't wish to offend any windows users so I'm gonna go ahead and pick you out in particular and call you a supreme idiot.

    6. Re:Time to upgrade to Windows? by Thong · · Score: 1

      (Apple marketing victim)

    7. Re: Time to upgrade to Windows? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I pity these folks.

    8. Re:Time to upgrade to Windows? by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      Obviously spoken by someone who never owned a Mac. Until the CPU fan gave out this summer, I had a Black MacBook (2006) that ran fine for the last eight years. Alas, with a 32-bit processor that's no longer supported, I didn't take it to the Apple Store to get fix. I had no problems switching over to Windows 8.1, as my data was in cross-platform formats. I'm looking forward to a new Mac next year.

  5. Linux on the desktop by nwf · · Score: 5, Funny

    This is just the sort of bug to get people to adopt Linux on the desktop, since it will be more similar to what they expect from Windows.

    --
    I don't know, but it works for me.
    1. Re:Linux on the desktop by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I just can't get enough humor of this calibre

    2. Re:Linux on the desktop by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes. Too bad it only affects rare server configurations.

    3. Re:Linux on the desktop by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      About time! Those Linux geeks had it way too easy anyway for far too long!

      ---signed, the Windows Server Team.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    4. Re:Linux on the desktop by NitsujTPU · · Score: 1

      This reminds me of the plotline from Userfriendly where one of the techs develops an OS called "The OS That Doesn't Suck." He eventually gives up this pursuit when it, too, begins to suck.

    5. Re:Linux on the desktop by spongman · · Score: 1

      wait, Windows locks up randomly now?

    6. Re:Linux on the desktop by thejynxed · · Score: 1

      Usually only when it involves an nvidia or AMD GPU driver :)

      --
      @Mindless Drivel: 100% of Twitter posts ever Tweeted.
    7. Re:Linux on the desktop by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      To be fair, GP only said that people expect it to.

    8. Re:Linux on the desktop by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      That would be Absurd Notions, not User Friendly.

    9. Re:Linux on the desktop by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My wife's Windows 7 machine does, on rare occasions (maybe once or twice a week for periods ranging from 10 seconds to indefinitely). Occurs randomly, and I can't seems to diagnose the cause. It happened far more regularly before I did a reformat, which seems to have at least reduced the occurrences considerably.

      I'm not sure whether to blame Windows or not since I'm a huge fan of Windows 7 and use it as my primary OS as well and don't have this issue. Memory tests don't show any flaws and replacing the graphics card didn't really change the occurrences of these freezes. Maybe it's a motherboard/power supply issue but so long as the freezing is rare, I'm not really in a position to care much anymore.

      Point is that Windows can still freeze under certain conditions, but as a whole the OS is much better than it used to be, and I think a lot of long-time Linux-only users still thing we live in the BSoD-era of Windows stability.

    10. Re:Linux on the desktop by NitsujTPU · · Score: 1

      Ack! Sorry about that! I knew it was an old old webcomic, and that it happened around the time when there were just millions of new UNIX-style operating systems with everyone claiming that theirs was good for a different reason.

    11. Re:Linux on the desktop by sound+vision · · Score: 1

      Graphics drivers haven't caused the system to lock up since Windows XP and the new driver model. Now if your graphics driver chokes, you get a second or two of black screen, then everything comes back up normally with a balloon in the system tray telling you it crashed.

      If you mean complete lockups or bluescreens, I've had two of those over five years of running Windows 7, and they were both when I was overclocking (none since).

    12. Re:Linux on the desktop by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes. Too bad it only affects rare server configurations.

      It happens to this guy when he is watching YouTube or playing an audio file.

    13. Re:Linux on the desktop by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I bought an Acer aspire netbook back in 2009 for an overseas trip. Locked up at least once every day. Ran Linux on a spare removable drive. Same problem. After months of searching, finally found a confirmation of the problem. Some incompatibilty between the motherboard chipset and the DRAM modules. Some users reported the only solution they found was replacing the modules with a lower speed, which seemed to fix the problem. So, I'd bet my last dollar the lockup problem is hardware based.

    14. Re:Linux on the desktop by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I had a complete lockup yesterday while running Windows 7.
      Stability wise not much have changed between XP and 7.

    15. Re:Linux on the desktop by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh, that's what that means! I've got intel graphics though.

    16. Re:Linux on the desktop by kmoser · · Score: 1

      So you're saying 2015 will surely be the year of the Linux BSOD?

    17. Re:Linux on the desktop by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Usually stuff like that is third party vendor drivers.

    18. Re: Linux on the desktop by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Simple, you have defective hardware. Not the OS's fault.

  6. So excited by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    3.19, so wow.

  7. BSD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

    Does anyone even use Linux anymore? I know I've switched all my boxes to BSD ages ago.

    1. Re:BSD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This sort of disingenuous comments, this snark coming from a position of weakness, isn't even a little bit cute and is only funny because of how dorky it is.
      It's like an American pretending not to understand prices in USD and instead asking shopkeepers to convert to bitcoin first.
      "Microsoft Windows? Never heard of it."
      lots of laughs trollfriend.

    2. Re:BSD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      whoa, that was a joke dude. Why are you getting so defensive? Did I hit a nerve?

    3. Re:BSD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have to admit that I got a bit nervous. I guess it's time for me to grab a beer from the local supermarket and relax a bit. :)

  8. The thing about BSD..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    It is official; Netcraft now confirms: *BSD is dying

    One more crippling bombshell hit the already beleaguered *BSD community when IDC confirmed that *BSD market share has dropped yet again, now down to less than a fraction of 1 percent of all servers. Coming close on the heels of a recent Netcraft survey which plainly states that *BSD has lost more market share, this news serves to reinforce what we've known all along. *BSD is collapsing in complete disarray, as fittingly exemplified by failing dead last in the recent Sys Admin comprehensive networking test.

    You don't need to be a Kreskin to predict *BSD's future. The hand writing is on the wall: *BSD faces a bleak future. In fact there won't be any future at all for *BSD because *BSD is dying. Things are looking very bad for *BSD. As many of us are already aware, *BSD continues to lose market share. Red ink flows like a river of blood.

    FreeBSD is the most endangered of them all, having lost 93% of its core developers. The sudden and unpleasant departures of long time FreeBSD developers Jordan Hubbard and Mike Smith only serve to underscore the point more clearly. There can no longer be any doubt: FreeBSD is dying.

    Let's keep to the facts and look at the numbers.

    OpenBSD leader Theo states that there are 7000 users of OpenBSD. How many users of NetBSD are there? Let's see. The number of OpenBSD versus NetBSD posts on Usenet is roughly in ratio of 5 to 1. Therefore there are about 7000/5 = 1400 NetBSD users. BSD/OS posts on Usenet are about half of the volume of NetBSD posts. Therefore there are about 700 users of BSD/OS. A recent article put FreeBSD at about 80 percent of the *BSD market. Therefore there are (7000+1400+700)*4 = 36400 FreeBSD users. This is consistent with the number of FreeBSD Usenet posts.

    Due to the troubles of Walnut Creek, abysmal sales and so on, FreeBSD went out of business and was taken over by BSDI who sell another troubled OS. Now BSDI is also dead, its corpse turned over to yet another charnel house.

    All major surveys show that *BSD has steadily declined in market share. *BSD is very sick and its long term survival prospects are very dim. If *BSD is to survive at all it will be among OS dilettante dabblers. *BSD continues to decay. Nothing short of a cockeyed miracle could save *BSD from its fate at this point in time. For all practical purposes, *BSD is dead.

    Fact: *BSD is dying
    Captcha: obsolete

    1. Re:The thing about BSD..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Did you post this after watching NetFlix from your macbook? This is a highly original post. Netcraft confirms it.

    2. Re:The thing about BSD..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What does "FreeBSD is not a business" even mean? What's your point? The person posted a snarky post about BSD, it's perfectly fine for the OP to post a snarky response back.

  9. Oh great, here come the Linux haters... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So Linux has a bug, big deal. It'l be fixed soon. Unlike Winblows which sucks so badly, but idiots keep buying into this crap. Because, windows is dumbed down for idiots.

    1. Re:Oh great, here come the Linux haters... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, quickly sweep this under the rug! We can dismiss this bug by pointing to Windows and saying something bad about it instead!

  10. Don't use Bleeding Edge Kernels by Zombie+Ryushu · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Don't use Bleeding Edge Kernels on Stable Production systems. I still use Kernels for 3.10, and 3.12 with security updates. I can't have Intermittent unexplained lockups.

    1. Re:Don't use Bleeding Edge Kernels by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      i still use kernel 1.7, myself, whippersnapper!!!

    2. Re:Don't use Bleeding Edge Kernels by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yup, mod this boy up.

      That's why we have Debian Stable...and you don't get Stable with the latest kernel.
      Even my home Linux boxes are ranging from 3.9 to 3.12, all up dated fully.
      Uptimes in the weeks to months, occasional IceWeasel crashes (probably that dammed Flash !), but that is not the OS fault.

    3. Re:Don't use Bleeding Edge Kernels by TeknoHog · · Score: 1

      I like pine kernels in my salad, and I PINE for the good old days when men where men and used real email clients, you sensitivity-challenged clod!

      --
      Escher was the first MC and Giger invented the HR department.
    4. Re:Don't use Bleeding Edge Kernels by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Don't use Random capitals in your Sentences. I don't Capitalize random words in My sentences. I don't want To look like I am Schizophrenic.

    5. Re:Don't use Bleeding Edge Kernels by marcello_dl · · Score: 1

      I have used 4 versions of 3.17 of void linux till now as my primary web and office desktop, not one lockup.

      Given that void doesn't feature it, it's obviously a systemd issue. :D

      --
      ---- MISSING MISCELLANEOUS DATA SEGMENT --- [sigdash] trolololol
    6. Re:Don't use Bleeding Edge Kernels by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My you are a bit touchy about capitalization.

      Was it the word "System" capitalized that was so offensive?
      I had assumed that Debian, Linux and Iceweasel, and Flash should be capitalized, you know proper nouns and all that.

    7. Re:Don't use Bleeding Edge Kernels by dbIII · · Score: 1

      Alpine is still out there and works on current platforms. I use it on a mail server to forward quarantined attachments to people when antimalware stops them posting executable files to each other. Mutt isn't bad either.

    8. Re:Don't use Bleeding Edge Kernels by sound+vision · · Score: 1

      Last I heard (admittedly it was on a Slashdot article so it could be wrong) the bug has been present for many years, since the 2.x kernels.

    9. Re:Don't use Bleeding Edge Kernels by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He dIdn'T uSe aNY oF tHoSE WorDs yoU inSenSiTiVE cLOd:

      Don't use Bleeding Edge Kernels on Stable Production systems. I still use Kernels for 3.10, and 3.12 with security updates. I can't have Intermittent unexplained lockups.

    10. Re:Don't use Bleeding Edge Kernels by jones_supa · · Score: 1

      Citation? You might be confusing this with some other bug.

    11. Re:Don't use Bleeding Edge Kernels by sound+vision · · Score: 1

      http://linux.slashdot.org/stor... "The problem was first suspected to be related to Xen. A patch dating back to 2005 was pushed for Xen to fix a vmalloc_fault() path that was similar to what was reported by Dave. The patch had a comment that read "the line below does not always work. Needs investigating!"

    12. Re:Don't use Bleeding Edge Kernels by jones_supa · · Score: 1

      Well, in the same summary it reads that Linus concluded that it's not a Xen bug. :)

    13. Re:Don't use Bleeding Edge Kernels by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are You sure that the capital Letters were truly random?
      Perhaps there was a Pattern to it that only Germans can detect?
      Perhaps i should start writing "i" in lowercase just to piss You off.

    14. Re:Don't use Bleeding Edge Kernels by TeknoHog · · Score: 1

      Yup, I've used Pine since the 1990s and I continue to use Alpine.

      "I use pine - not because its necessarily the greatest email reader ever, but because I'm used to it, and it does what I need it to do with a minimum of fuzz." -- Linus Torvalds

      --
      Escher was the first MC and Giger invented the HR department.
    15. Re:Don't use Bleeding Edge Kernels by ChrisMaple · · Score: 1

      Capitalization is the poor man's bold.

      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
  11. you need skooed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is actually a FEATURE, not a BUG. It's there so stupid fucken n00bs don't break their CPUs!

  12. oh yeah? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Shut up and eat yer pinecone!

  13. Linux is basically finished. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

    Windows 10 is going to kick Linux's ass *again* on the desktop for general users. OS X continues to take over developer environments and Linux on the server is basically stagnant in the face of massive FreeBSD and Windows Server wins across the industry. The only thing Linux has going for it these days is Android, but of course it is only successful because Google spends billions of dollars to patch over the baked-in shittiness of the Linux kernel.

    1. Re:Linux is basically finished. by savuporo · · Score: 0

      Android, and Chromebooks.

      --
      http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.slashdot.org Errors found while checking this document as HTML5!
    2. Re:Linux is basically finished. by jfdavis668 · · Score: 2

      And IBM continues to dominate the mainframe field.

    3. Re:Linux is basically finished. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Windows hasn't kicked any asses, they just piss off users into ditching it for Linux.

    4. Re:Linux is basically finished. by Zontar+The+Mindless · · Score: 2

      Wow, APK managed an entire post without bolding or all-caps... Colour me surprised.

      --
      Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
    5. Re:Linux is basically finished. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Android

      Did you read his post? He specifically called out Android:
      The only thing Linux has going for it these days is Android

      and Chromebooks.

      No, Chromebooks have done very little for Linux on the desktop. In fact the OS is so limited that no desktop computers even run it, just lowend laptops. Chromebooks cant do anything you cant do on Windows or OSX and are far more limited in what applications they can run, they are a race to the bottom competing on price alone.

    6. Re:Linux is basically finished. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why all the Linux zealots modding good posts down, mod parent up! Great comment. I agree Android is pretty much the only good Linux software out there these days.

    7. Re:Linux is basically finished. by jopsen · · Score: 1

      Why all the Linux zealots modding good posts down, mod parent up! Great comment. I agree Android is pretty much the only good Linux software out there these days.

      Yes, let's use windows on the server, ha ha :)

    8. Re:Linux is basically finished. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      they just piss off users into ditching it for Linux.

      +5 funny.

    9. Re:Linux is basically finished. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe because it's not true? Don't be an asshole.

    10. Re:Linux is basically finished. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Millions of companies do, and uniformly they report significant ongoing cost savings after switching from Linux. Linux is only "free" if your time has no value and as this "ongoing lockup bug" demonstrates, when you use a hobbyist level OS, you get hobbyist level programmers making hobbyist level mistakes.

    11. Re:Linux is basically finished. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Good point. Linux is a lot like the mainframe. It still exists and is used in some places to limited success (and with massive and ongoing cost), but its marketshare is stagnant and the industry is finally waking up to the realization that it has made a bad bet. It turns out closed source software is actually a lot better than open source software and that all the claims made by the open source people were laughably wrong. When you use software written by amateurs and hobbyists, it turns out you end up with software written by amateurs and hobbyists. Surprise!

    12. Re:Linux is basically finished. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Totally true. Linux seems like more of a research project than a well engineered system.

    13. Re:Linux is basically finished. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Anyone who talks about "wins" in this context is a moron. But someone thinks we need salespeople, too, I guess...

  14. Slackware by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

    bash-4.2$ uname -r
    3.10.17
    Slackware. No lockup, no pulseaudio, no systemd.

    1. Re:Slackware by jones_supa · · Score: 0

      There is some wisdom to that comment. Instead of trying to build enterprise-level systems with lack of developers, the open source community might wind up with more stable system by sticking with something more simple. Linux Mint grabbed GNOME2 which became MATE, and it has been hugely successful. Simple, fast, stable.

    2. Re:Slackware by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      set your PS1, you filthy casual.

  15. WANTED: Millions of pairs of eyes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Millions of people with access to the Linux source code have failed to locate the bug. That sucks!

  16. Dissecting != Bisecting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Bisecting is a technical term with a specific meaning. Essentially, he is using a binary search through git history to identify when the bug was introduced. Dissecting does not convey this. But I guess it is too much to ask to have the submitter both read and understand TFA.

    1. Re:Dissecting != Bisecting by jones_supa · · Score: 2

      Bisecting is a technical term with a specific meaning. Essentially, he is using a binary search through git history to identify when the bug was introduced. Dissecting does not convey this. But I guess it is too much to ask to have the submitter both read and understand TFA.

      Submitter here. In this case samzenpus has to take the blame, because in my original submission the word is "bisecting". :)

    2. Re:Dissecting != Bisecting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Then again, dissecting means (among other things) "to study or examine (something) closely and carefully" (from Merriam-Webster), which I suppose is also what the guy is going.

    3. Re:Dissecting != Bisecting by a_n_d_e_r_s · · Score: 1

      Yeah, the editors of slashdot are not fluent in computer science lingo that is common within open source where one work with many different version and need to make sure regression not happen e.g. the linux kernel.

      Also if editor had googled the word this statement is visible in the Wikipedia page about bisecting:

      "Not to be confused with Dissection."

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B...

      Dissection is mostly known as a biological term about using an scalpel to examine plants, animals or humans.

      --
      Just saying it like it are.
  17. Piss off, you "Doesn't affect me!" dickheads. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    People like you are a pox on open source software today.

    Just because it doesn't affect you and the small number of Linux systems that you use, that does not mean that it doesn't cause problems for other people. It clearly does, otherwise there wouldn't be investigation into why it's happening.

    Your attitude is fucking idiotic, and very harmful. It's just like what we see out of the Mozilla community. Many Firefox users describe how Firefox uses a huge amount of CPU and/or memory on their systems, but dickfaces like you just say, "It doesn't happen on my system, so it can't possibly happen on yours!" And what have we seen these Firefox users do, when shown such complete disrespect? They ditched Firefox and move to Chrome.

    Your shitty attitude is now spreading throughout the Linux ecosystem. It ruined GNOME. It's in the process of ruining Debian, thanks to all of that systemd bullshit. Now it's even affecting the kernel itself.

    You're part of the reason why so many people are fed up with Linux and its open source ecosystem, and are moving to FreeBSD. The FreeBSD community takes problems like this seriously. They don't have your piss-poor attitude when it comes to real problems like this one.

    1. Re:Piss off, you "Doesn't affect me!" dickheads. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, I'm one of those people totally fed up with Linux. I moved to BSD where things are actually engineered. It's a breathe of fresh air.

    2. Re:Piss off, you "Doesn't affect me!" dickheads. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Both you and parent have a point imo, but you seem to be overreacting.

      Yes, a bug that affects almost nobody IS less of a problem. It was present in 3.17 and nobody was hit hard enough to even report it.
      This is not comparable to projects like GNOME making major controversial changes willingly and repeatedly. This is some odd bug that'll get bisected and fixed soon, that will never affect you, and that doesn't derve all that much press.

    3. Re:Piss off, you "Doesn't affect me!" dickheads. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I guess nobody tries to say that the bug is not real, but please think the issue with some perspective. Do you really think the Linux community should just stop the line and all of them should start investigating a issue that can be reproduced only by one or two guys? Quite likely there are only few people in the world who know the code well enough that they can debug it. The other developers are specialized on different parts of kernel and need to get their job done there. Linus himself said that there is no point to delay a release thanks to one issue, that has only now surfaced, even if it has been there since at least from previous release. And I completely agree with him on this.

    4. Re:Piss off, you "Doesn't affect me!" dickheads. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Your attitude is fucking idiotic, and very harmful. It's just like what we see out of the
      Phoronix is a troll/FUD website devoid of journalism. That is more harmfull.

      >spreading throughout the Linux ecosystem. It ruined GNOME. It's in the process of ruining Debian
      GNOME ruined GNOME, Debian is fine.

      > You're part of the reason why so many people are fed up with Linux and its open source ecosystem, and
      Citation or you're making stuff up. Numbers please.

    5. Re:Piss off, you "Doesn't affect me!" dickheads. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      breath*

  18. The thing about BSD..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You are nut. FreeBSD is not a business so never going out of business.

  19. merge window due to the holidays later this month? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What?! Holidays being used as an accuse is unacceptable!

    Must have kernel releases on a consistent schedule. No breaks for these devs. Slackers...

    At least that's what my bosses want.

  20. Not until Linux version 10 by Crazy+Taco · · Score: 1

    This is just the sort of bug to get people to adopt Linux on the desktop, since it will be more similar to what they expect from Windows.

    Not me! I refuse to use software as immature as version 3 of Linux. Mac is on OS version 10, Windows is about to release version 10, and by golly, I'm not wasting a second of my time on Linux until it catches up!

    --
    Beware of bugs in the above code; I have only proved it correct, not tried it.
  21. Better links by lanroth · · Score: 1

    LWN: https://lwn.net/Articles/62497...
    kernelnewbies: http://kernelnewbies.org/Linux...
    omgubuntu: http://www.omgubuntu.co.uk/201...

  22. I'm just special I guess by wilberfan · · Score: 1

    I don 't know whether to feel pissed or special (or both), but I've been experiencing this lockup on my lowly little Arch box. (Reverting to a previous kernel always clears it up.) I couldn't find anything in the Arch forums about it, so I appreciate being kept abreast of it here! :)

  23. Nice discrimination you've got there by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why don't we see articles titled "Windows released, bug still present"?

    e.g.: Windows has allegedly supported Unicode since NT 4.0 yet Windows Search still cannot find text in big endian UCS2 files and can only find ASCII text in UTF8 files.