Bug#311185: linux-2.6: Does the Debian Kernel Team still have concerns about CONFIG_PREEMPT ?

[maximilian attems <max@stro.at>]

hello francesco,

nice to read you! :)

On Thu, Dec 13, 2007 at 12:10:04AM +0100, Francesco Poli wrote:
> 
> If I understand the following output correctly, the current (testing) Linux
> kernel does *not* have any preemption activated:
> 
>   $ grep -i EMPT /boot/config-2.6.22-3-amd64 
>   CONFIG_PREEMPT_NONE=y
>   # CONFIG_PREEMPT_VOLUNTARY is not set
>   # CONFIG_PREEMPT is not set
>   # CONFIG_PREEMPT_BKL is not set

yep, this is current state.
 
> By reading the bug log, I seem to understand that this is due to stability
> concerns by the Debian Kernel Team.
> Do these concerns still hold, now that more than 2 years have passed?

well partialy
but due to shipment in all major distribution volountary preemption
is beeing reconsidered as well preempt_bkl
http://lists.debian.org/debian-kernel/2007/11/msg00496.html
tickless kernel is an environmental necessity and thus enabled
http://lists.debian.org/debian-kernel/2007/12/msg00014.html
hz_1000 needs a benchmark run.

the stability != preempt seems no longer true as the preempt
path gets more testing out there.
 
> If I read /usr/share/doc/jackd/README.Debian correctly, activating
> preemption would benefit audio applications, especially:
> 
> |        3. use a 2.6 kernel with the realtime-preempt patch applied
> 
> I would love to see Debian as ready as possible for setting up an audio
> processing workstation with minimal configuration (and without recompiling
> kernels or other packages).

well the realtime patch already helped a lot,
but is not ready for default.
it is currently quite marketing hyped by rh and suse.

warm greetings

-- 
maks