Hi, Phoronix recently release article[1] about Intel's Clear Linux with some cool graphs showing nice performance gain compared to Xubuntu.
I didn't have time to dig in and look how it's performing against Fedora, but I'd assume Fedora can be compared to Xubuntu in terms of compiler settings.
I think i'll be interesting to look into it and find out if Fedora can't tweak compiler settings (eg use LTO for critical things like Mesa, Kernel, ...). I think it could be interesting fo Fedora users to have this enabled if there are not any disadvantages other than compile time, compile memory usage and so on.
What do you think?
[1] http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=intel-clr-opengl&...
On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 12:42:26AM +0200, František Zatloukal wrote:
I think i'll be interesting to look into it and find out if Fedora can't tweak compiler settings (eg use LTO for critical things like Mesa, Kernel, ...). I think it could be interesting fo Fedora users to have this enabled if there are not any disadvantages other than compile time, compile memory usage and so on.
What do you think?
There might be some things to look at. But in general, Clear Linux can do that because they only care about Intel CPUs and, I think, only the newer versions. We want to also run well on AMD and (probably) older generations of hardware. So, for example, we use '-mtune=generic'.
On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 5:02 AM, Matthew Miller mattdm@fedoraproject.org wrote:
On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 12:42:26AM +0200, František Zatloukal wrote:
I think i'll be interesting to look into it and find out if Fedora can't tweak compiler settings (eg use LTO for critical things like Mesa, Kernel, ...). I think it could be interesting fo Fedora users to have this enabled if there are not any disadvantages other than compile time, compile memory usage and so on.
What do you think?
There might be some things to look at. But in general, Clear Linux can do that because they only care about Intel CPUs and, I think, only the newer versions. We want to also run well on AMD and (probably) older generations of hardware. So, for example, we use '-mtune=generic'.
Specifically for the kernel, I believe Intel is carrying patches to enable LTO that are not upstream yet. Andi Kleen is working on pushing them upstream but they haven't made it as far as I know.
josh
On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 12:42:26AM +0200, František Zatloukal wrote:
Hi, Phoronix recently release article[1] about Intel's Clear Linux with some cool graphs showing nice performance gain compared to Xubuntu.
I didn't have time to dig in and look how it's performing against Fedora, but I'd assume Fedora can be compared to Xubuntu in terms of compiler settings.
I think i'll be interesting to look into it and find out if Fedora can't tweak compiler settings (eg use LTO for critical things like Mesa, Kernel, ...). I think it could be interesting fo Fedora users to have this enabled if there are not any disadvantages other than compile time, compile memory usage and so on.
What do you think?
The article you posted seems to concentrate on graphics performance which I've not looked at. However I have looked at Intel's boot / container performance in great detail.
I'm doing a bit of work improving the performance of qemu and the kernel to match what Intel Clear Linux can do (which is impressive, especially for running containers securely).
Unfortunately the Intel kernel is heavily patched with non-upstream patches, and not even patches which could become upstream (they do things like commenting out chunks of code with single line commit messages). There's not really any way we can use the Intel work directly. Also Intel's kernel uses a very cut-down configuration, but Fedora kernel developers would prefer (with good reason) to ship a single kernel image for all use cases, and by necessity that is a "full fat" kernel.
So it's a long process. I've proposed a talk about this subject at the KVM Forum 2016 at the end of August.
Rich.
Would it be possible to mirror the Clear Linux kernel in copr or a third-party dnf repo?
That would allow Fedora to keep it's general purpose kernel but then allow performance hounds to install the Clear Linux kernel.
There is something similar already for people who want to use upstream vanilla kernel.
The Clear Linux performance metrics posted by Phoronix are compelling.
On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 11:39 PM Hayden Barnes thbarnes@icloud.com wrote:
Would it be possible to mirror the Clear Linux kernel in copr or a
third-party dnf repo?
Yes, if someone wishes to build and maintain that kernel.
josh
Yes, if someone wishes to build and maintain that kernel.
How difficult is this ? newbie, sophmore cse student but would like to give this a shot if this isn't too difficult.Want to start contributing.
On Wed, May 16, 2018 at 8:18 PM, Josh Boyer jwboyer@fedoraproject.org wrote:
On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 11:39 PM Hayden Barnes thbarnes@icloud.com wrote:
Would it be possible to mirror the Clear Linux kernel in copr or a
third-party dnf repo?
Yes, if someone wishes to build and maintain that kernel.
josh _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org
On 16 May 2018 at 11:09, Manas Mangaonkar manasmangaonkar@gmail.com wrote:
Yes, if someone wishes to build and maintain that kernel.
How difficult is this ? newbie, sophmore cse student but would like to give this a shot if this isn't too difficult.Want to start contributing.
It is going to be one of those, you aren't going to know until you have tried to do it. You could look at one of the 'default' kernels src.rpms and then set up a copr to build it in with the source code you want. You can then work out the hangs/crashes/etc from there. I would probably start with building something smaller in COPR so you know what a spec file does, what copr does and what it can get.
On Wed, May 16, 2018 at 8:18 PM, Josh Boyer jwboyer@fedoraproject.org wrote:
On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 11:39 PM Hayden Barnes thbarnes@icloud.com wrote:
Would it be possible to mirror the Clear Linux kernel in copr or a
third-party dnf repo?
Yes, if someone wishes to build and maintain that kernel.
josh _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org
-- Regards, Manas Mangaonkar Content Manager | Intern ProgrammingHub
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org
On Wed, 16 May 2018 20:39:02 +0530 Manas Mangaonkar manasmangaonkar@gmail.com wrote:
Yes, if someone wishes to build and maintain that kernel.
How difficult is this ? newbie, sophmore cse student but would like to give this a shot if this isn't too difficult.Want to start contributing.
I build a custom kernel from the src.rpm with a patch to random.c to add code so that my hardware RNG is used to reseed the chacha20 PRNG on a periodic basis. That is similar, if easier, to what you would have to do to maintain a different kernel. The first time would be a bear, then after that it would just be repeating the procedure.
I use the older rpmbuild method, so I'm not sure how that agrees with the currently recommended method. Here goes. This is long, and a lot of the details are missing.
Install the rpmbuild packages.
Run rpmbuild-setuptree to build the rpmbuild directory tree in your home directory.
Go to koji and get the kernel src.rpm
Run rpm -ivh to install it to the rpmbuild directory.
I then use screen to have a bunch of terms available, so I'm not constantly having to switch directories, but you could just switch between a bunch of virtual consoles.
Go into the ~/rpmbuild/SPECS directory. You'll see kernel.spec in there.
Run rpmbuild -bp kernel.spec to expand the source.
When it is done, go into the ~/rpmbuild/BUILD/kernel[]/linux[]/ directory. Since fedora now builds all kernels from a git repository, it is necessary to build patches for them from that git repository. It's a PITA, but necessary.
Run git add .
Run git commit -a
Just add a throwaway comment and save.
Run git status.
Everything should be up to date.
Run git config user.name "blah"
Run git config user.email "blah@blah.com"
Run git branch clear to create a new branch for the clear linux kernel.
Run git checkout clear to set that as the working branch.
This is more complicated than I need, since you are basically creating a patch from the fedora kernel to the clear kernel. Delete everything in the branch except the hidden .git directory.
Grab the clear linux source tree and put it into the clear branch you just cleaned up. tar? git pull?
Run git add .
Run git commit -a.
Put in a comment and save.
Run git status to be sure the branch is clean.
Run git format-patch clear-linux
Put the resulting patch in ~/rpmbuild/SOURCES with a unique numerical prefix.
Put the patch name in ~/rpmbuild/SPECS/kernel.spec just before END OF PATCHES.
Run rpmbuild -bb kernel.spec
You will have the kernel rpm files in ~/rpmbuild/RPMS/x86_64
The gotchas are left as an exercise for the reader (if you are a newbie, there will be lots of them). :-) And it's rough, there is a lot of optimization that I left out.
So it's a lot of work, but a great learning experience if you are up for it.
Put the patch name in ~/rpmbuild/SPECS/kernel.spec just before END OF PATCHES.
Run rpmbuild -bb kernel.spec
You will have the kernel rpm files in ~/rpmbuild/RPMS/x86_64
The gotchas are left as an exercise for the reader (if you are a newbie, there will be lots of them). :-) And it's rough, there is a lot of optimization that I left out.
So it's a lot of work, but a great learning experience if you are up for it.
okay,i'll give it a shot sounds fun will get to learn something. Cant guarantee a completion data though.15-20 days should be enough i guess.
On Thu, May 17, 2018 at 8:25 AM, Manas Mangaonkar manasmangaonkar@gmail.com wrote:
Put the patch name in ~/rpmbuild/SPECS/kernel.spec just before END OF PATCHES.
Run rpmbuild -bb kernel.spec
You will have the kernel rpm files in ~/rpmbuild/RPMS/x86_64
The gotchas are left as an exercise for the reader (if you are a newbie, there will be lots of them). :-) And it's rough, there is a lot of optimization that I left out.
So it's a lot of work, but a great learning experience if you are up for it.
okay,i'll give it a shot sounds fun will get to learn something. Cant guarantee a completion data though.15-20 days should be enough i guess.
Maintaining a kernel isn't a one off event it's an ongoing process. The vast majority of the work is getting the initial build working but from there it's an ongoing process to keep it up to date to ensure your users aren't vulnerable to CVEs etc.
On Thu, 17 May 2018, 1:08 p.m. Peter Robinson, pbrobinson@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, May 17, 2018 at 8:25 AM, Manas Mangaonkar manasmangaonkar@gmail.com wrote:
Put the patch name in ~/rpmbuild/SPECS/kernel.spec just before END OF PATCHES.
Run rpmbuild -bb kernel.spec
You will have the kernel rpm files in ~/rpmbuild/RPMS/x86_64
The gotchas are left as an exercise for the reader (if you are a newbie, there will be lots of them). :-) And it's rough, there is a lot of optimization that I left out.
So it's a lot of work, but a great learning experience if you are up for it.
okay,i'll give it a shot sounds fun will get to learn something. Cant guarantee a completion data though.15-20 days should be enough i guess.
Maintaining a kernel isn't a one off event it's an ongoing process. The vast majority of the work is getting the initial build working but from there it's an ongoing process to keep it up to date to ensure your users aren't vulnerable to CVEs etc. _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org
Ah,yes.Proposed the the above mentioned timeline for the initial build.I am ready to dedicate time to maintain it.
For the record,I am going with the kernel Lts given that it has patches for meltdown & spectre.
On Thu, May 17, 2018 at 1:21 PM, Manas Mangaonkar <manasmangaonkar@gmail.com
wrote:
On Thu, 17 May 2018, 1:08 p.m. Peter Robinson, pbrobinson@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, May 17, 2018 at 8:25 AM, Manas Mangaonkar manasmangaonkar@gmail.com wrote:
Put the patch name in ~/rpmbuild/SPECS/kernel.spec just before END OF PATCHES.
Run rpmbuild -bb kernel.spec
You will have the kernel rpm files in ~/rpmbuild/RPMS/x86_64
The gotchas are left as an exercise for the reader (if you are a newbie, there will be lots of them). :-) And it's rough, there is a lot of optimization that I left out.
So it's a lot of work, but a great learning experience if you are up for it.
okay,i'll give it a shot sounds fun will get to learn something. Cant guarantee a completion data though.15-20 days should be enough i guess.
Maintaining a kernel isn't a one off event it's an ongoing process. The vast majority of the work is getting the initial build working but from there it's an ongoing process to keep it up to date to ensure your users aren't vulnerable to CVEs etc. _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org
Ah,yes.Proposed the the above mentioned timeline for the initial build.I am ready to dedicate time to maintain it.
On Sat, 19 May 2018 16:24:17 +0530 Manas Mangaonkar manasmangaonkar@gmail.com wrote:
For the record,I am going with the kernel Lts given that it has patches for meltdown & spectre.
There are recent kernels without the patches? I think they are standard in all fedora kernels.
To get your feet wet, you could build a standard Fedora kernel using one of these processes.
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Building_a_custom_kernel
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/quick-docs/en-US/kernel/build-custom-kernel.h...
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Building_a_custom_kernel/Source_RPM
Then, when you have that working, use the same procedure to build the clear linux kernel from source. That way you know that both compile individually.
The final step is just to ensure that once the Fedora kernel is patched to support clear linux, it compiles also. Then it will support the Fedora enhancements to the kernel that haven't made it upstream yet (and might never), and will run on any fedora system.
I don't know if the clear linux kernel is compatible with other architectures and video hardware. If it isn't, it can only be run on x86_64 with intel video hardware (no nvidia or amd additional video hardware). If it isn't compatible with other architectures or video hardware, I don't think it makes sense to compile it as a Fedora kernel, so you would be done after you get it building from source. Not sure how useful such a kernel would be.
On Sun, May 20, 2018 at 4:11 PM, stan stanl-fedorauser@vfemail.net wrote:
On Sat, 19 May 2018 16:24:17 +0530 Manas Mangaonkar manasmangaonkar@gmail.com wrote:
For the record,I am going with the kernel Lts given that it has patches for meltdown & spectre.
There are recent kernels without the patches? I think they are standard in all fedora kernels.
The upstream non LTS kernels have had the mitigation for meltdown/spectre longer than LTS and they likely have more robust implementations. All Fedora releases have had fixes for some time.
To get your feet wet, you could build a standard Fedora kernel using one of these processes.
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Building_a_custom_kernel
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/quick-docs/en-US/kernel/build-custom-kernel.h...
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Building_a_custom_kernel/Source_RPM
Then, when you have that working, use the same procedure to build the clear linux kernel from source. That way you know that both compile individually.
The final step is just to ensure that once the Fedora kernel is patched to support clear linux, it compiles also. Then it will support the Fedora enhancements to the kernel that haven't made it upstream yet (and might never), and will run on any fedora system.
I don't know if the clear linux kernel is compatible with other architectures and video hardware. If it isn't, it can only be run on x86_64 with intel video hardware (no nvidia or amd additional video hardware). If it isn't compatible with other architectures or video hardware, I don't think it makes sense to compile it as a Fedora kernel, so you would be done after you get it building from source. Not sure how useful such a kernel would be. _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/...
The upstream non LTS kernels have had the mitigation for meltdown/spectre longer than LTS and they likely have more robust implementations. All Fedora releases have had fixes for some time.
I meant the clear linux kernel,they seem to have diff kernel bundles and i want to go with the Lts one.
To get your feet wet, you could build a standard Fedora kernel using one of these processes.
build-custom-kernel.html
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Building_a_custom_kernel/Source_RPM
Then, when you have that working, use the same procedure to build the clear linux kernel from source. That way you know that both compile individually.
The final step is just to ensure that once the Fedora kernel is patched to support clear linux, it compiles also. Then it will support the Fedora enhancements to the kernel that haven't made it upstream yet (and might never), and will run on any fedora system.
I don't know if the clear linux kernel is compatible with other architectures and video hardware. If it isn't, it can only be run on x86_64 with intel video hardware (no nvidia or amd additional video hardware). If it isn't compatible with other architectures or video hardware, I don't think it makes sense to compile it as a Fedora kernel, so you would be done after you get it building from source. Not sure how useful such a kernel would be. _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.
org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/ SDS3J723DDZB6VNXHD2DVD2STHC7TDSY/ _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists. fedoraproject.org/message/BA3RBXY3PYJ4U2H5LCLJ6ZWTX4FITDGS/
The clear linux does run on amd hardware,at phoronix they tried it on the new eypec cpu line from amd. Performs well and wont hinder performance.
hardware, I don't think it makes sense to compile it as a Fedora kernel, so you would be done after you get it building from source. Not sure how useful such a kernel would be.
No nvidia or amd gpu support though.But for those who want pure computing power for containers etc this can be a solid option,it does perform much better than other linux distro kernels.
I find this interesting,and a fun learning experience to get my feet wet.
Just a update,Ended up with a somewhat broken kernel that had performance issues with the lts patches even after lot of tweaking.Apparently the clear linux base kernel source tree is stable and working with latest Linux kernels. Still working on it incase anyone is wondering if this was abandoned.
On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 11:48 AM, Manas Mangaonkar < manasmangaonkar@gmail.com> wrote:
The upstream non LTS kernels have had the mitigation for
meltdown/spectre longer than LTS and they likely have more robust implementations. All Fedora releases have had fixes for some time.
I meant the clear linux kernel,they seem to have diff kernel bundlesand i want to go with the Lts one.
To get your feet wet, you could build a standard Fedora kernel using one of these processes.
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Building_a_custom_kernel
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/quick-docs/en-US/kernel/build
-custom-kernel.html
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Building_a_custom_kernel/Source_RPM
Then, when you have that working, use the same procedure to build the clear linux kernel from source. That way you know that both compile individually.
The final step is just to ensure that once the Fedora kernel is patched to support clear linux, it compiles also. Then it will support the Fedora enhancements to the kernel that haven't made it upstream yet (and might never), and will run on any fedora system.
I don't know if the clear linux kernel is compatible with other architectures and video hardware. If it isn't, it can only be run on x86_64 with intel video hardware (no nvidia or amd additional video hardware). If it isn't compatible with other architectures or video hardware, I don't think it makes sense to compile it as a Fedora kernel, so you would be done after you get it building from source. Not sure how useful such a kernel would be. _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.or
g/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/SDS3J7 23DDZB6VNXHD2DVD2STHC7TDSY/ _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.or g/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/BA3RBX Y3PYJ4U2H5LCLJ6ZWTX4FITDGS/
The clear linux does run on amd hardware,at phoronix they tried it on the new eypec cpu line from amd. Performs well and wont hinder performance.
hardware, I don't think it makes sense to compile it as a Fedora kernel, so you would be done after you get it building from source. Not sure how useful such a kernel would be.
No nvidia or amd gpu support though.But for those who want pure computing power for containers etc this can be a solid option,it does perform much better than other linux distro kernels.
I find this interesting,and a fun learning experience to get my feet wet.
Rpm Generation Done, Sorry for the really long delay. Request someone to test it out.
On Mon, Jun 18, 2018 at 4:54 PM, Manas Mangaonkar <manasmangaonkar@gmail.com
wrote:
Just a update,Ended up with a somewhat broken kernel that had performance issues with the lts patches even after lot of tweaking.Apparently the clear linux base kernel source tree is stable and working with latest Linux kernels. Still working on it incase anyone is wondering if this was abandoned.
On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 11:48 AM, Manas Mangaonkar < manasmangaonkar@gmail.com> wrote:
The upstream non LTS kernels have had the mitigation for
meltdown/spectre longer than LTS and they likely have more robust implementations. All Fedora releases have had fixes for some time.
I meant the clear linux kernel,they seem to have diff kernel bundlesand i want to go with the Lts one.
To get your feet wet, you could build a standard Fedora kernel using one of these processes.
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Building_a_custom_kernel
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/quick-docs/en-US/kernel/build
-custom-kernel.html
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Building_a_custom_kernel/Source_RPM
Then, when you have that working, use the same procedure to build the clear linux kernel from source. That way you know that both compile individually.
The final step is just to ensure that once the Fedora kernel is patched to support clear linux, it compiles also. Then it will support the Fedora enhancements to the kernel that haven't made it upstream yet (and might never), and will run on any fedora system.
I don't know if the clear linux kernel is compatible with other architectures and video hardware. If it isn't, it can only be run on x86_64 with intel video hardware (no nvidia or amd additional video hardware). If it isn't compatible with other architectures or video hardware, I don't think it makes sense to compile it as a Fedora kernel, so you would be done after you get it building from source. Not sure how useful such a kernel would be. _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki
/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.or
g/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/SDS3J7 23DDZB6VNXHD2DVD2STHC7TDSY/ _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.or g/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/BA3RBX Y3PYJ4U2H5LCLJ6ZWTX4FITDGS/
The clear linux does run on amd hardware,at phoronix they tried it on the new eypec cpu line from amd. Performs well and wont hinder performance.
hardware, I don't think it makes sense to compile it as a Fedora kernel, so you would be done after you get it building from source. Not sure how useful such a kernel would be.
No nvidia or amd gpu support though.But for those who want pure computing power for containers etc this can be a solid option,it does perform much better than other linux distro kernels.
I find this interesting,and a fun learning experience to get my feet wet.
On Thu, Jul 12, 2018 at 10:09 AM, Manas Mangaonkar manasmangaonkar@gmail.com wrote:
Rpm Generation Done, Sorry for the really long delay. Request someone to test it out.
URL?
The Actual Url https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/pac23/High_Performance_Clear_LInux_kernel_for_Fedora/
On Fri, Jul 13, 2018 at 12:01 AM, Chris Murphy lists@colorremedies.com wrote:
On Thu, Jul 12, 2018 at 10:09 AM, Manas Mangaonkar manasmangaonkar@gmail.com wrote:
Rpm Generation Done, Sorry for the really long delay. Request someone to test it out.
URL?
-- Chris Murphy _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists. fedoraproject.org/message/UBETVVKZ3WMLRGTLF3IWQOADORTGHWRS/
On Mon, Jul 16, 2018 at 10:33 PM Manas Mangaonkar manasmangaonkar@gmail.com wrote:
The Actual Url https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/pac23/High_Performance_Clear_LInux_kernel_for_Fedora/
FYI, have been running kernel 4.18.0-0.rc0.git10.1.fc28.x86_64 since a day, haven't noticed any breakages :-) But 'swapper' process seems to be hyperactive compared to the fc28 4.17.6 kernel. Output from $perf top -sort comm,dso
28.20% swapper [kernel] 6.44% konsole libQt5Gui.so.5.10.1 5.85% plasmashell [kernel] 5.76% Xorg [kernel] 4.00% konsole [kernel] 3.87% kwin_x11 [kernel] 2.96% QXcbEventReader [kernel] 2.74% Xorg libc-2.27.so 2.66% firefox libxul.so 2.50% swapper [unknown] 2.35% kworker/0:2-mm_ [kernel] 2.34% kworker/1:1-mm_ [kernel] 2.01% irq/51-SYNA2B29 [kernel] 1.72% Xorg Xorg 1.54% InputThread [kernel] 1.42% konsole libkonsoleprivate.so.17.12.2 1.32% plasmashell libQt5Core.so.5.10.1 1.06% konsole libharfbuzz.so.0.10705.0 1.03% firefox [kernel] 0.92% konsole libQt5XcbQpa.so.5.10.1 0.76% kworker/u8:4-ev [kernel] 0.75% kwin_x11 libQt5Core.so.5.10.1 0.72% konsole libQt5Core.so.5.10.1 0.72% perf libslang.so.2.3.2 0.69% kworker/0:3-eve [kernel] 0.60% perf [kernel] 0.58% kwin_x11 i965_dri.so 0.48% plasmashell libglib-2.0.so.0.5600.1 0.45% rcu_sched [kernel] 0.43% JS Helper libxul.so 0.39% konsole libpthread-2.27.so 0.39% kwin_x11 libkwin.so.5.13.3 0.37% kwin_x11 libc-2.27.so
Good to here there haven't been any breakages.
I will look into the swapper process issue asap.
On Thu, 19 Jul 2018, 10:38 Rajeesh K V, rajeeshknambiar@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Jul 16, 2018 at 10:33 PM Manas Mangaonkar < manasmangaonkar@gmail.com> wrote:
The Actual Url https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/pac23/High_Performance_Clear_LInux_kernel_for_Fedora/
FYI, have been running kernel 4.18.0-0.rc0.git10.1.fc28.x86_64 since a day, haven't noticed any breakages :-) But 'swapper' process seems to be hyperactive compared to the fc28 4.17.6 kernel. Output from $perf top -sort comm,dso
28.20% swapper [kernel] 6.44% konsole libQt5Gui.so.5.10.1 5.85% plasmashell [kernel] 5.76% Xorg [kernel] 4.00% konsole [kernel] 3.87% kwin_x11 [kernel] 2.96% QXcbEventReader [kernel] 2.74% Xorg libc-2.27.so 2.66% firefox libxul.so 2.50% swapper [unknown] 2.35% kworker/0:2-mm_ [kernel] 2.34% kworker/1:1-mm_ [kernel] 2.01% irq/51-SYNA2B29 [kernel] 1.72% Xorg Xorg 1.54% InputThread [kernel] 1.42% konsole libkonsoleprivate.so.17.12.2 1.32% plasmashell libQt5Core.so.5.10.1 1.06% konsole libharfbuzz.so.0.10705.0 1.03% firefox [kernel] 0.92% konsole libQt5XcbQpa.so.5.10.1 0.76% kworker/u8:4-ev [kernel] 0.75% kwin_x11 libQt5Core.so.5.10.1 0.72% konsole libQt5Core.so.5.10.1 0.72% perf libslang.so.2.3.2 0.69% kworker/0:3-eve [kernel] 0.60% perf [kernel] 0.58% kwin_x11 i965_dri.so 0.48% plasmashell libglib-2.0.so.0.5600.1 0.45% rcu_sched [kernel] 0.43% JS Helper libxul.so 0.39% konsole libpthread-2.27.so 0.39% kwin_x11 libkwin.so.5.13.3 0.37% kwin_x11 libc-2.27.so
-- Rajeesh
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/...
On 7/19/18, Manas Mangaonkar manasmangaonkar@gmail.com wrote:
Good to here there haven't been any breakages.
I will look into the swapper process issue asap.
Thanks. Output from $perf top -F 49
16.19% [kernel] [k] sdhci_irq 7.72% [unknown] [.] 0000000000000000 5.50% [kernel] [k] __lock_acquire 2.70% [kernel] [k] lock_release 2.14% [kernel] [k] lock_acquire 1.95% [kernel] [k] lock_is_held_type 1.73% [kernel] [k] native_sched_clock 1.18% [kernel] [k] dw_readl 1.17% libc-2.27.so [.] __memmove_avx_unaligned_erms 1.07% [kernel] [k] lock_acquired 1.05% [kernel] [k] __fget 1.01% libQt5Core.so.5.10.1 [.] QString::append 0.85% libQt5Core.so.5.10.1 [.] 0x00000000002be7d4 0.72% [kernel] [k] get_mem_cgroup_from_mm 0.71% [kernel] [k] mark_lock 0.69% [kernel] [k] __lock_is_held 0.69% [kernel] [k] idma64_irq 0.63% libxul.so [.] 0x000000000345edd4 0.61% [kernel] [k] match_held_lock 0.59% [kernel] [k] update_blocked_averages 0.59% [kernel] [k] _raw_spin_lock_irqsave 0.58% firefox [.] free 0.58% libpthread-2.27.so [.] __pthread_mutex_lock 0.53% [kernel] [k] __schedule 0.52% [kernel] [k] do_raw_spin_trylock 0.52% libc-2.27.so [.] malloc 0.49% libxul.so [.] 0x0000000002543cd2 0.49% [kernel] [k] sock_poll 0.47% [kernel] [k] policy_node
Thabks
On Thu, 19 Jul 2018, 12:29 Rajeesh K V, rajeeshknambiar@gmail.com wrote:
On 7/19/18, Manas Mangaonkar manasmangaonkar@gmail.com wrote:
Good to here there haven't been any breakages.
I will look into the swapper process issue asap.
Thanks. Output from $perf top -F 49
16.19% [kernel] [k] sdhci_irq 7.72% [unknown] [.] 0000000000000000 5.50% [kernel] [k] __lock_acquire 2.70% [kernel] [k] lock_release 2.14% [kernel] [k] lock_acquire 1.95% [kernel] [k] lock_is_held_type 1.73% [kernel] [k] native_sched_clock 1.18% [kernel] [k] dw_readl 1.17% libc-2.27.so [.] __memmove_avx_unaligned_erms 1.07% [kernel] [k] lock_acquired 1.05% [kernel] [k] __fget 1.01% libQt5Core.so.5.10.1 [.] QString::append 0.85% libQt5Core.so.5.10.1 [.] 0x00000000002be7d4 0.72% [kernel] [k] get_mem_cgroup_from_mm 0.71% [kernel] [k] mark_lock 0.69% [kernel] [k] __lock_is_held 0.69% [kernel] [k] idma64_irq 0.63% libxul.so [.] 0x000000000345edd4 0.61% [kernel] [k] match_held_lock 0.59% [kernel] [k] update_blocked_averages 0.59% [kernel] [k] _raw_spin_lock_irqsave 0.58% firefox [.] free 0.58% libpthread-2.27.so [.] __pthread_mutex_lock 0.53% [kernel] [k] __schedule 0.52% [kernel] [k] do_raw_spin_trylock 0.52% libc-2.27.so [.] malloc 0.49% libxul.so [.] 0x0000000002543cd2 0.49% [kernel] [k] sock_poll 0.47% [kernel] [k] policy_node
-- Rajeesh _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/...
Can you give some more details as those would help Investigate the problem better.
On Thu, 19 Jul 2018, 10:38 Rajeesh K V, rajeeshknambiar@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Jul 16, 2018 at 10:33 PM Manas Mangaonkar < manasmangaonkar@gmail.com> wrote:
The Actual Url https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/pac23/High_Performance_Clear_LInux_kernel_for_Fedora/
FYI, have been running kernel 4.18.0-0.rc0.git10.1.fc28.x86_64 since a day, haven't noticed any breakages :-) But 'swapper' process seems to be hyperactive compared to the fc28 4.17.6 kernel. Output from $perf top -sort comm,dso
28.20% swapper [kernel] 6.44% konsole libQt5Gui.so.5.10.1 5.85% plasmashell [kernel] 5.76% Xorg [kernel] 4.00% konsole [kernel] 3.87% kwin_x11 [kernel] 2.96% QXcbEventReader [kernel] 2.74% Xorg libc-2.27.so 2.66% firefox libxul.so 2.50% swapper [unknown] 2.35% kworker/0:2-mm_ [kernel] 2.34% kworker/1:1-mm_ [kernel] 2.01% irq/51-SYNA2B29 [kernel] 1.72% Xorg Xorg 1.54% InputThread [kernel] 1.42% konsole libkonsoleprivate.so.17.12.2 1.32% plasmashell libQt5Core.so.5.10.1 1.06% konsole libharfbuzz.so.0.10705.0 1.03% firefox [kernel] 0.92% konsole libQt5XcbQpa.so.5.10.1 0.76% kworker/u8:4-ev [kernel] 0.75% kwin_x11 libQt5Core.so.5.10.1 0.72% konsole libQt5Core.so.5.10.1 0.72% perf libslang.so.2.3.2 0.69% kworker/0:3-eve [kernel] 0.60% perf [kernel] 0.58% kwin_x11 i965_dri.so 0.48% plasmashell libglib-2.0.so.0.5600.1 0.45% rcu_sched [kernel] 0.43% JS Helper libxul.so 0.39% konsole libpthread-2.27.so 0.39% kwin_x11 libkwin.so.5.13.3 0.37% kwin_x11 libc-2.27.so
-- Rajeesh
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/...
On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 12:52 PM Manas Mangaonkar manasmangaonkar@gmail.com wrote:
Can you give some more details as those would help Investigate the problem better.
What additional information would you like to know?
[P.S.: please avoid top-posting.]
What additional information would you like to know?
Like what you were running etc because i didn't notice anything that weird on my end.Sorry for the delay have been busy with college work.
On Fri, Jul 20, 2018 at 2:52 PM, Rajeesh K V rajeeshknambiar@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 12:52 PM Manas Mangaonkar < manasmangaonkar@gmail.com> wrote:
Can you give some more details as those would help Investigate the problem better.
What additional information would you like to know?
[P.S.: please avoid top-posting.]
-- Rajeesh
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists. fedoraproject.org/message/KKWUK7CVF46Z2VEUEGS5LPR5DT4XL4NH/
What additional information would you like to know?
Like what you were running etc because i didn't notice anything that weird on my end.Sorry for the delay have been busy with college work.
The processes run are listed in the mail on 16 July. The apps are mostly Firefox with half a dozen tabs or so, Konsole with few tabs, Dolphin etc on a KDE Plasma desktop. Occasionally postgresql database with a python2.7 application, but the `perf' traces were taken while these aren't running.
Thank you for the information,i'll look into and get back asap.
On Mon, 23 Jul 2018, 22:26 Rajeesh K V, rajeeshknambiar@gmail.com wrote:
What additional information would you like to know? Like what you were running etc because i didn't notice anything that weird on my end.Sorry for the delay have been busy with college work.
The processes run are listed in the mail on 16 July. The apps are mostly Firefox with half a dozen tabs or so, Konsole with few tabs, Dolphin etc on a KDE Plasma desktop. Occasionally postgresql database with a python2.7 application, but the `perf' traces were taken while these aren't running.
-- Rajeesh
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/...
The processes run are listed in the mail on 16 July. The apps are mostly
Firefox with half a dozen tabs or so, Konsole with few tabs, Dolphin etc on a KDE Plasma desktop. Occasionally postgresql database with a python2.7 application, but the `perf' traces were taken while these aren't running.
-- Rajeesh
What architecture/cpu are you running ? i am updating this package with the latest fixes mostly for persistent c-state problems.
On Mon, Jul 23, 2018 at 9:38 PM, Rajeesh K V rajeeshknambiar@gmail.com wrote:
What additional information would you like to know? Like what you were running etc because i didn't notice anything that weird on my end.Sorry for the delay have been busy with college work.
The processes run are listed in the mail on 16 July. The apps are mostly Firefox with half a dozen tabs or so, Konsole with few tabs, Dolphin etc on a KDE Plasma desktop. Occasionally postgresql database with a python2.7 application, but the `perf' traces were taken while these aren't running.
-- Rajeesh
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists. fedoraproject.org/message/O7MO2VAR42676U5SLWHYIDQCZULXTSBG/
On Mon, Jul 16, 2018 at 10:49 AM, Manas Mangaonkar manasmangaonkar@gmail.com wrote:
The Actual Url
I've got the copr enabled, but I can't figure out how to install the kernel. Even though I don't have -devel -cross-headers -headers for this kernel installed, those packages are included in a normal 'dnf update' for some reason. But not the kernel. And 'dnf install kernel' just points out the obvious, that kernels are already installed.
No offense but can you kindly rephrase whatever you said.Its kinda difficult to decipher as your sentences seem to contradict.
On Thu, 19 Jul 2018, 20:06 Chris Murphy, lists@colorremedies.com wrote:
On Mon, Jul 16, 2018 at 10:49 AM, Manas Mangaonkar manasmangaonkar@gmail.com wrote:
The Actual Url
I've got the copr enabled, but I can't figure out how to install the kernel. Even though I don't have -devel -cross-headers -headers for this kernel installed, those packages are included in a normal 'dnf update' for some reason. But not the kernel. And 'dnf install kernel' just points out the obvious, that kernels are already installed.
-- Chris Murphy _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/...
On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 10:08 AM, Manas Mangaonkar manasmangaonkar@gmail.com wrote:
No offense but can you kindly rephrase whatever you said.Its kinda difficult to decipher as your sentences seem to contradict.
I need installation instructions to use this kernel, apparently. I've got the copr enabled, but can't figure out how to actually install the kernel and kernel modules.
On Mon, Jul 23, 2018 at 8:08 PM Chris Murphy lists@colorremedies.com wrote:
On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 10:08 AM, Manas Mangaonkar manasmangaonkar@gmail.com wrote:
No offense but can you kindly rephrase whatever you said.Its kinda
difficult
to decipher as your sentences seem to contradict.
I need installation instructions to use this kernel, apparently. I've got the copr enabled, but can't figure out how to actually install the kernel and kernel modules.
I think you should be just able to do $ sudo dnf upgrade kernel
clime
-- Chris Murphy _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/...
On 07/23/2018 11:06 AM, Chris Murphy wrote:
I need installation instructions to use this kernel, apparently. I've got the copr enabled, but can't figure out how to actually install the kernel and kernel modules.
If you used dnf to enable the copr repository, then "dnf list --all kernel" should show you at least one from there. An upgrade won't work if the version in the copr is lower than the latest one in the main Fedora repo, so you might need to do a dnf install with the specific version.
On Mon, Jul 23, 2018 at 2:20 PM, Samuel Sieb samuel@sieb.net wrote:
On 07/23/2018 11:06 AM, Chris Murphy wrote:
I need installation instructions to use this kernel, apparently. I've got the copr enabled, but can't figure out how to actually install the kernel and kernel modules.
If you used dnf to enable the copr repository, then "dnf list --all kernel" should show you at least one from there. An upgrade won't work if the version in the copr is lower than the latest one in the main Fedora repo, so you might need to do a dnf install with the specific version.
Nope.
[chris@f28h ~]$ sudo dnf list --all kernel [sudo] password for chris: Last metadata expiration check: 0:51:18 ago on Mon 23 Jul 2018 10:12:29 PM MDT. Installed Packages kernel.x86_64 4.17.3-200.fc28 @@commandline kernel.x86_64 4.17.4-200.fc28 @@commandline kernel.x86_64 4.17.6-200.fc28 @@commandline kernel.x86_64 4.17.7-200.fc28 @@commandline kernel.x86_64 4.18.0-0.rc3.git1.1.fc29 @@commandline kernel.x86_64 4.18.0-0.rc4.git2.1.fc29 @@commandline kernel.x86_64 4.18.0-0.rc5.git1.1.fc29 @@commandline Available Packages kernel.src 4.18.0-0.rc0.git10.1.fc28 pac23-High_Performance_Clear_LInux_kernel_for_Fedora [chris@f28h ~]$
On 07/23/2018 10:04 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
Available Packages kernel.src 4.18.0-0.rc0.git10.1.fc28 pac23-High_Performance_Clear_LInux_kernel_for_Fedora
This is what I get:
# dnf list --all kernel Installed Packages kernel.x86_64 4.16.11-300.fc28 @updates kernel.x86_64 4.17.4-200.fc28 @updates-testing kernel.x86_64 4.17.7-200.fc28 @updates Available Packages kernel.src 4.18.0-0.rc0.git10.1.fc28 pac23-High_Performance_Clear_LInux_kernel_for_Fedora kernel.x86_64 4.18.0-0.rc0.git10.1.fc28 pac23-High_Performance_Clear_LInux_kernel_for_Fedora
That last one is highlighted in blue. The problem is that it seems to only show packages that would be an upgrade, even though "--all" should override that. Try adding "--showduplicates", that gives me:
# dnf list --all --showduplicates kernel Installed Packages kernel.x86_64 4.16.11-300.fc28 @updates kernel.x86_64 4.17.4-200.fc28 @updates-testing kernel.x86_64 4.17.7-200.fc28 @updates Available Packages kernel.x86_64 4.16.3-301.fc28 fedora kernel.x86_64 4.16.11-300.fc28 @updates kernel.x86_64 4.17.4-200.fc28 @updates-testing kernel.x86_64 4.17.7-200.fc28 @updates kernel.x86_64 4.17.7-200.fc28 updates kernel.src 4.18.0-0.rc0.git10.1.fc28 pac23-High_Performance_Clear_LInux_kernel_for_Fedora kernel.x86_64 4.18.0-0.rc0.git10.1.fc28 pac23-High_Performance_Clear_LInux_kernel_for_Fedora
Now it shows me the old one from the initial fedora release repo as well.
This was my first repo/package sorry if i messed up somewhere.
On Tue, 24 Jul 2018, 12:11 Samuel Sieb, samuel@sieb.net wrote:
On 07/23/2018 10:04 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
Available Packages kernel.src 4.18.0-0.rc0.git10.1.fc28 pac23-High_Performance_Clear_LInux_kernel_for_Fedora
This is what I get:
# dnf list --all kernel Installed Packages kernel.x86_64 4.16.11-300.fc28 @updates kernel.x86_64 4.17.4-200.fc28 @updates-testing kernel.x86_64 4.17.7-200.fc28 @updates Available Packages kernel.src 4.18.0-0.rc0.git10.1.fc28 pac23-High_Performance_Clear_LInux_kernel_for_Fedora kernel.x86_64 4.18.0-0.rc0.git10.1.fc28 pac23-High_Performance_Clear_LInux_kernel_for_Fedora
That last one is highlighted in blue. The problem is that it seems to only show packages that would be an upgrade, even though "--all" should override that. Try adding "--showduplicates", that gives me:
# dnf list --all --showduplicates kernel Installed Packages kernel.x86_64 4.16.11-300.fc28 @updates kernel.x86_64 4.17.4-200.fc28 @updates-testing kernel.x86_64 4.17.7-200.fc28 @updates Available Packages kernel.x86_64 4.16.3-301.fc28 fedora kernel.x86_64 4.16.11-300.fc28 @updates kernel.x86_64 4.17.4-200.fc28 @updates-testing kernel.x86_64 4.17.7-200.fc28 @updates kernel.x86_64 4.17.7-200.fc28 updates kernel.src 4.18.0-0.rc0.git10.1.fc28 pac23-High_Performance_Clear_LInux_kernel_for_Fedora kernel.x86_64 4.18.0-0.rc0.git10.1.fc28 pac23-High_Performance_Clear_LInux_kernel_for_Fedora
Now it shows me the old one from the initial fedora release repo as well. _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/...
On 07/23/2018 11:53 PM, Manas Mangaonkar wrote:
This was my first repo/package sorry if i messed up somewhere.
I don't personally have any interest in this package, but I don't see anything wrong with how it's setup. It's just a little tricky installing packages that have the same name, but lower version numbers than what is in the main Fedora repos.
It's just a little tricky installing packages that have the same name, but lower > version numbers
than what is in the main Fedora repos.
I will update the documentation,thanks.
On Tue, 24 Jul 2018, 13:56 Samuel Sieb, samuel@sieb.net wrote:
On 07/23/2018 11:53 PM, Manas Mangaonkar wrote:
This was my first repo/package sorry if i messed up somewhere.
I don't personally have any interest in this package, but I don't see anything wrong with how it's setup. It's just a little tricky installing packages that have the same name, but lower version numbers than what is in the main Fedora repos. _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/...
On Mon, Jul 23, 2018 at 11:56 PM, Samuel Sieb samuel@sieb.net wrote:
On 07/23/2018 10:04 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
Available Packages kernel.src 4.18.0-0.rc0.git10.1.fc28 pac23-High_Performance_Clear_LInux_kernel_for_Fedora
This is what I get:
# dnf list --all kernel Installed Packages kernel.x86_64 4.16.11-300.fc28 @updates kernel.x86_64 4.17.4-200.fc28 @updates-testing kernel.x86_64 4.17.7-200.fc28 @updates Available Packages kernel.src 4.18.0-0.rc0.git10.1.fc28 pac23-High_Performance_Clear_LInux_kernel_for_Fedora kernel.x86_64 4.18.0-0.rc0.git10.1.fc28 pac23-High_Performance_Clear_LInux_kernel_for_Fedora
That last one is highlighted in blue. The problem is that it seems to only show packages that would be an upgrade, even though "--all" should override that. Try adding "--showduplicates", that gives me:
# dnf list --all --showduplicates kernel Installed Packages kernel.x86_64 4.16.11-300.fc28 @updates kernel.x86_64 4.17.4-200.fc28 @updates-testing kernel.x86_64 4.17.7-200.fc28 @updates Available Packages kernel.x86_64 4.16.3-301.fc28 fedora kernel.x86_64 4.16.11-300.fc28 @updates kernel.x86_64 4.17.4-200.fc28 @updates-testing kernel.x86_64 4.17.7-200.fc28 @updates kernel.x86_64 4.17.7-200.fc28 updates kernel.src 4.18.0-0.rc0.git10.1.fc28 pac23-High_Performance_Clear_LInux_kernel_for_Fedora kernel.x86_64 4.18.0-0.rc0.git10.1.fc28 pac23-High_Performance_Clear_LInux_kernel_for_Fedora
Now it shows me the old one from the initial fedora release repo as well.
[chris@f28h ~]$ sudo dnf list --all --showduplicates kernel [sudo] password for chris: Last metadata expiration check: 0:39:32 ago on Tue 24 Jul 2018 11:21:48 AM MDT. Installed Packages kernel.x86_64 4.17.3-200.fc28 @@commandline kernel.x86_64 4.17.4-200.fc28 @@commandline kernel.x86_64 4.17.6-200.fc28 @@commandline kernel.x86_64 4.17.7-200.fc28 @@commandline kernel.x86_64 4.18.0-0.rc3.git1.1.fc29 @@commandline kernel.x86_64 4.18.0-0.rc4.git2.1.fc29 @@commandline kernel.x86_64 4.18.0-0.rc5.git1.1.fc29 @@commandline Available Packages kernel.x86_64 4.16.3-301.fc28 fedora kernel.x86_64 4.17.3-200.fc28 @@commandline kernel.x86_64 4.17.4-200.fc28 @@commandline kernel.x86_64 4.17.6-200.fc28 @@commandline kernel.x86_64 4.17.7-200.fc28 @@commandline kernel.x86_64 4.17.7-200.fc28 updates kernel.src 4.18.0-0.rc0.git10.1.fc28 pac23-High_Performance_Clear_LInux_kernel_for_Fedora kernel.x86_64 4.18.0-0.rc0.git10.1.fc28 pac23-High_Performance_Clear_LInux_kernel_for_Fedora kernel.x86_64 4.18.0-0.rc3.git1.1.fc29 @@commandline kernel.x86_64 4.18.0-0.rc4.git2.1.fc29 @@commandline kernel.x86_64 4.18.0-0.rc5.git1.1.fc29 @@commandline [chris@f28h ~]$ sudo dnf install kernel-4.18.0-0.rc0.git10.1.fc28.x86_64 Last metadata expiration check: 0:42:59 ago on Tue 24 Jul 2018 11:21:48 AM MDT. Dependencies resolved. ==================================================================================================== Package Arch Version Repository Size ==================================================================================================== Installing: kernel x86_64 4.18.0-0.rc0.git10.1.fc28 pac23-High_Performance_Clear_LInux_kernel_for_Fedora 48 k Installing dependencies: kernel-core x86_64 4.18.0-0.rc0.git10.1.fc28 pac23-High_Performance_Clear_LInux_kernel_for_Fedora 26 M kernel-modules x86_64 4.18.0-0.rc0.git10.1.fc28 pac23-High_Performance_Clear_LInux_kernel_for_Fedora 29 M
Transaction Summary ==================================================================================================== Install 3 Packages
Total download size: 54 M Installed size: 91 M Is this ok [y/N]:
OK so it has to be explicitly named. I'm not sure what happens if there ends up being a name conflict with two enabled repos though, I guess I'd have to disablerepo for updates and u-t to force it to use the one in the copr.
On Tue, Jul 24, 2018 at 11:37 PM, Chris Murphy lists@colorremedies.com wrote:
On Mon, Jul 23, 2018 at 11:56 PM, Samuel Sieb samuel@sieb.net wrote:
On 07/23/2018 10:04 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
Available Packages kernel.src 4.18.0-0.rc0.git10.1.fc28 pac23-High_Performance_Clear_LInux_kernel_for_Fedora
This is what I get:
# dnf list --all kernel Installed Packages kernel.x86_64 4.16.11-300.fc28 @updates kernel.x86_64 4.17.4-200.fc28 @updates-testing kernel.x86_64 4.17.7-200.fc28 @updates Available Packages kernel.src 4.18.0-0.rc0.git10.1.fc28 pac23-High_Performance_Clear_LInux_kernel_for_Fedora kernel.x86_64 4.18.0-0.rc0.git10.1.fc28 pac23-High_Performance_Clear_LInux_kernel_for_Fedora
That last one is highlighted in blue. The problem is that it seems to
only
show packages that would be an upgrade, even though "--all" should
override
that. Try adding "--showduplicates", that gives me:
# dnf list --all --showduplicates kernel Installed Packages kernel.x86_64 4.16.11-300.fc28 @updates kernel.x86_64 4.17.4-200.fc28 @updates-testing kernel.x86_64 4.17.7-200.fc28 @updates Available Packages kernel.x86_64 4.16.3-301.fc28
fedora
kernel.x86_64 4.16.11-300.fc28 @updates kernel.x86_64 4.17.4-200.fc28 @updates-testing kernel.x86_64 4.17.7-200.fc28 @updates kernel.x86_64 4.17.7-200.fc28
updates
kernel.src 4.18.0-0.rc0.git10.1.fc28 pac23-High_Performance_Clear_LInux_kernel_for_Fedora kernel.x86_64 4.18.0-0.rc0.git10.1.fc28 pac23-High_Performance_Clear_LInux_kernel_for_Fedora
Now it shows me the old one from the initial fedora release repo as well.
[chris@f28h ~]$ sudo dnf list --all --showduplicates kernel [sudo] password for chris: Last metadata expiration check: 0:39:32 ago on Tue 24 Jul 2018 11:21:48 AM MDT. Installed Packages kernel.x86_64 4.17.3-200.fc28 @@commandline kernel.x86_64 4.17.4-200.fc28 @@commandline kernel.x86_64 4.17.6-200.fc28 @@commandline kernel.x86_64 4.17.7-200.fc28 @@commandline kernel.x86_64 4.18.0-0.rc3.git1.1.fc29 @@commandline kernel.x86_64 4.18.0-0.rc4.git2.1.fc29 @@commandline kernel.x86_64 4.18.0-0.rc5.git1.1.fc29 @@commandline Available Packages kernel.x86_64 4.16.3-301.fc28 fedora kernel.x86_64 4.17.3-200.fc28 @@commandline kernel.x86_64 4.17.4-200.fc28 @@commandline kernel.x86_64 4.17.6-200.fc28 @@commandline kernel.x86_64 4.17.7-200.fc28 @@commandline kernel.x86_64 4.17.7-200.fc28 updates kernel.src 4.18.0-0.rc0.git10.1.fc28 pac23-High_Performance_Clear_LInux_kernel_for_Fedora kernel.x86_64 4.18.0-0.rc0.git10.1.fc28 pac23-High_Performance_Clear_LInux_kernel_for_Fedora kernel.x86_64 4.18.0-0.rc3.git1.1.fc29 @@commandline kernel.x86_64 4.18.0-0.rc4.git2.1.fc29 @@commandline kernel.x86_64 4.18.0-0.rc5.git1.1.fc29 @@commandline [chris@f28h ~]$ sudo dnf install kernel-4.18.0-0.rc0.git10.1.fc28.x86_64 Last metadata expiration check: 0:42:59 ago on Tue 24 Jul 2018 11:21:48 AM MDT. Dependencies resolved. ============================================================ ======================================== Package Arch Version Repository Size ============================================================ ======================================== Installing: kernel x86_64 4.18.0-0.rc0.git10.1.fc28 pac23-High_Performance_Clear_LInux_kernel_for_Fedora 48 k Installing dependencies: kernel-core x86_64 4.18.0-0.rc0.git10.1.fc28 pac23-High_Performance_Clear_LInux_kernel_for_Fedora 26 M kernel-modules x86_64 4.18.0-0.rc0.git10.1.fc28 pac23-High_Performance_Clear_LInux_kernel_for_Fedora 29 M
Transaction Summary
======================================== Install 3 Packages
Total download size: 54 M Installed size: 91 M Is this ok [y/N]:
OK so it has to be explicitly named. I'm not sure what happens if there ends up being a name conflict with two enabled repos though, I guess I'd have to disablerepo for updates and u-t to force it to use the one in the copr.
-- Chris Murphy _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists. fedoraproject.org/message/SZGW72AQ4RR4Q4RIOHECUVJET63YVEM7/
I will rebuild it to fix this,also whoever that was concerned with the swapping process issue i am working on it,also a issue has been created upstream,the person who did it for arch reported similar issues too.
On Wed, 2018-05-16 at 10:48 -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 11:39 PM Hayden Barnes thbarnes@icloud.com wrote:
Would it be possible to mirror the Clear Linux kernel in copr or a
third-party dnf repo?
Yes, if someone wishes to build and maintain that kernel.
BTW : I'd like test drm-tip kernel
https://cgit.freedesktop.org/drm-tip? related with https://01.org/linuxgraphics/documentation/build-guide-0
anyone ?
reference: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=103414#c16
josh _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org
On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 10:38 PM, Hayden Barnes thbarnes@icloud.com wrote:
Would it be possible to mirror the Clear Linux kernel in copr or a third-party dnf repo?
That would allow Fedora to keep it's general purpose kernel but then allow performance hounds to install the Clear Linux kernel.
There is something similar already for people who want to use upstream vanilla kernel.
The Clear Linux performance metrics posted by Phoronix are compelling. _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org
Maybe a great blog to read about Clear Linux could be this:
https://clearlinux.org/blogs/transparent-use-library-packages-optimized-inte...
Regards
Victor
Thank you for the blog link victor , interesting read it is.
- Manas
On Sun, 26 Aug 2018, 23:03 Victor Rodriguez, vm.rod25@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 10:38 PM, Hayden Barnes thbarnes@icloud.com wrote:
Would it be possible to mirror the Clear Linux kernel in copr or a
third-party dnf repo?
That would allow Fedora to keep it's general purpose kernel but then
allow performance hounds to install the Clear Linux kernel.
There is something similar already for people who want to use upstream
vanilla kernel.
The Clear Linux performance metrics posted by Phoronix are compelling. _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org
Maybe a great blog to read about Clear Linux could be this:
https://clearlinux.org/blogs/transparent-use-library-packages-optimized-inte...
Regards
Victor _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
On Sun, Aug 26, 2018 at 12:40 PM, Manas Mangaonkar manasmangaonkar@gmail.com wrote:
Thank you for the blog link victor , interesting read it is.
Fedora is already in glibc 2.28 it is possible to do the same approach
- Manas
On Sun, 26 Aug 2018, 23:03 Victor Rodriguez, vm.rod25@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 10:38 PM, Hayden Barnes thbarnes@icloud.com wrote:
Would it be possible to mirror the Clear Linux kernel in copr or a third-party dnf repo?
That would allow Fedora to keep it's general purpose kernel but then allow performance hounds to install the Clear Linux kernel.
There is something similar already for people who want to use upstream vanilla kernel.
The Clear Linux performance metrics posted by Phoronix are compelling. _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org
Maybe a great blog to read about Clear Linux could be this:
https://clearlinux.org/blogs/transparent-use-library-packages-optimized-inte...
Regards
Victor _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora is already in glibc 2.28 it is possible to do the > > same approach
TBH I don't really know how that'd be done with the current package,would love to learn.
On Tue, Aug 28, 2018, 3:09 AM Victor Rodriguez vm.rod25@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Aug 26, 2018 at 12:40 PM, Manas Mangaonkar manasmangaonkar@gmail.com wrote:
Thank you for the blog link victor , interesting read it is.
Fedora is already in glibc 2.28 it is possible to do the same approach
- Manas
On Sun, 26 Aug 2018, 23:03 Victor Rodriguez, vm.rod25@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 10:38 PM, Hayden Barnes thbarnes@icloud.com wrote:
Would it be possible to mirror the Clear Linux kernel in copr or a third-party dnf repo?
That would allow Fedora to keep it's general purpose kernel but then allow performance hounds to install the Clear Linux kernel.
There is something similar already for people who want to use upstream vanilla kernel.
The Clear Linux performance metrics posted by Phoronix are compelling. _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org
Maybe a great blog to read about Clear Linux could be this:
https://clearlinux.org/blogs/transparent-use-library-packages-optimized-inte...
Regards
Victor _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
On Thu, Sep 6, 2018 at 12:15 AM, Manas Mangaonkar manasmangaonkar@gmail.com wrote:
Fedora is already in glibc 2.28 it is possible to do the > > same approach
TBH I don't really know how that'd be done with the current package,would love to learn.
Please take a look at my slides : https://schd.ws/hosted_files/ossna2017/6b/Boosting_GLIBC_GCC.pdf from last year OSSNA
There is a description of the main idea and how does it work here :
https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=Clear-Linux-NA2017-O...
feel free to ping me for any further questons
regards
On Tue, Aug 28, 2018, 3:09 AM Victor Rodriguez vm.rod25@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Aug 26, 2018 at 12:40 PM, Manas Mangaonkar manasmangaonkar@gmail.com wrote:
Thank you for the blog link victor , interesting read it is.
Fedora is already in glibc 2.28 it is possible to do the same approach
- Manas
On Sun, 26 Aug 2018, 23:03 Victor Rodriguez, vm.rod25@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 10:38 PM, Hayden Barnes thbarnes@icloud.com wrote:
Would it be possible to mirror the Clear Linux kernel in copr or a third-party dnf repo?
That would allow Fedora to keep it's general purpose kernel but then allow performance hounds to install the Clear Linux kernel.
There is something similar already for people who want to use upstream vanilla kernel.
The Clear Linux performance metrics posted by Phoronix are compelling. _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org
Maybe a great blog to read about Clear Linux could be this:
https://clearlinux.org/blogs/transparent-use-library-packages-optimized-inte...
Regards
Victor _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Sorry for the really delayed reply.
Please take a look at my slides : https://schd.ws/hosted_files/ossna2017/6b/Boosting_GLIBC_GCC.pdf from last year OSSNA
There is a description of the main idea and how does it work here :
https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=Clear-Linux-NA2017-O...
Really nice and informative slides.
feel free to ping me for any further questons Fedora is already in glibc 2.28 it is possible to do the same approach
I still don't get what exactly do you want me to implement, referring to the previous mails,super noob here.
On Fri, Sep 14, 2018 at 12:48 AM Victor Rodriguez vm.rod25@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Sep 6, 2018 at 12:15 AM, Manas Mangaonkar manasmangaonkar@gmail.com wrote:
Fedora is already in glibc 2.28 it is possible to do the > > same
approach
TBH I don't really know how that'd be done with the current package,would love to learn.
Please take a look at my slides : https://schd.ws/hosted_files/ossna2017/6b/Boosting_GLIBC_GCC.pdf from last year OSSNA
There is a description of the main idea and how does it work here :
https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=Clear-Linux-NA2017-O...
feel free to ping me for any further questons
regards
On Tue, Aug 28, 2018, 3:09 AM Victor Rodriguez vm.rod25@gmail.com
wrote:
On Sun, Aug 26, 2018 at 12:40 PM, Manas Mangaonkar manasmangaonkar@gmail.com wrote:
Thank you for the blog link victor , interesting read it is.
Fedora is already in glibc 2.28 it is possible to do the same approach
- Manas
On Sun, 26 Aug 2018, 23:03 Victor Rodriguez, vm.rod25@gmail.com
wrote:
On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 10:38 PM, Hayden Barnes <thbarnes@icloud.com
wrote:
Would it be possible to mirror the Clear Linux kernel in copr or a third-party dnf repo?
That would allow Fedora to keep it's general purpose kernel but
then
allow performance hounds to install the Clear Linux kernel.
There is something similar already for people who want to use upstream vanilla kernel.
The Clear Linux performance metrics posted by Phoronix are compelling. _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to
devel-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org
Maybe a great blog to read about Clear Linux could be this:
https://clearlinux.org/blogs/transparent-use-library-packages-optimized-inte...
Regards
Victor _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/pac23/Kernel-clear/ updated copr link
On Sun, Oct 28, 2018 at 7:27 PM Manas Mangaonkar manasmangaonkar@gmail.com wrote:
Sorry for the really delayed reply.
Please take a look at my slides : https://schd.ws/hosted_files/ossna2017/6b/Boosting_GLIBC_GCC.pdf from last year OSSNA
There is a description of the main idea and how does it work here :
https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=Clear-Linux-NA2017-O...
Really nice and informative slides.
feel free to ping me for any further questons Fedora is already in glibc 2.28 it is possible to do the same approach
I still don't get what exactly do you want me to implement, referring to the previous mails,super noob here.
On Fri, Sep 14, 2018 at 12:48 AM Victor Rodriguez vm.rod25@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Sep 6, 2018 at 12:15 AM, Manas Mangaonkar manasmangaonkar@gmail.com wrote:
Fedora is already in glibc 2.28 it is possible to do the > > same
approach
TBH I don't really know how that'd be done with the current
package,would
love to learn.
Please take a look at my slides : https://schd.ws/hosted_files/ossna2017/6b/Boosting_GLIBC_GCC.pdf from last year OSSNA
There is a description of the main idea and how does it work here :
https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=Clear-Linux-NA2017-O...
feel free to ping me for any further questons
regards
On Tue, Aug 28, 2018, 3:09 AM Victor Rodriguez vm.rod25@gmail.com
wrote:
On Sun, Aug 26, 2018 at 12:40 PM, Manas Mangaonkar manasmangaonkar@gmail.com wrote:
Thank you for the blog link victor , interesting read it is.
Fedora is already in glibc 2.28 it is possible to do the same approach
- Manas
On Sun, 26 Aug 2018, 23:03 Victor Rodriguez, vm.rod25@gmail.com
wrote:
On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 10:38 PM, Hayden Barnes <
thbarnes@icloud.com>
wrote: > Would it be possible to mirror the Clear Linux kernel in copr or a > third-party dnf repo? > > That would allow Fedora to keep it's general purpose kernel but
then
> allow performance hounds to install the Clear Linux kernel. > > There is something similar already for people who want to use > upstream > vanilla kernel. > > The Clear Linux performance metrics posted by Phoronix are > compelling. > _______________________________________________ > devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org > To unsubscribe send an email to
devel-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org
Maybe a great blog to read about Clear Linux could be this:
https://clearlinux.org/blogs/transparent-use-library-packages-optimized-inte...
Regards
Victor _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
On Fri, Feb 8, 2019 at 5:11 PM Manas Mangaonkar manasmangaonkar@gmail.com wrote:
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/pac23/Kernel-clear/ updated copr link
Nice ! Having more kernel options for Fedora users is really cool
Apart from that , what could give a good boost in numerical apps might be this
https://clearlinux.org/blogs/transparent-use-library-packages-optimized-inte...
regards
On Sun, Oct 28, 2018 at 7:27 PM Manas Mangaonkar manasmangaonkar@gmail.com wrote:
Sorry for the really delayed reply.
Please take a look at my slides : https://schd.ws/hosted_files/ossna2017/6b/Boosting_GLIBC_GCC.pdf from last year OSSNA
There is a description of the main idea and how does it work here :
https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=Clear-Linux-NA2017-O...
Really nice and informative slides.
feel free to ping me for any further questons Fedora is already in glibc 2.28 it is possible to do the same approach
I still don't get what exactly do you want me to implement, referring to the previous mails,super noob here.
On Fri, Sep 14, 2018 at 12:48 AM Victor Rodriguez vm.rod25@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Sep 6, 2018 at 12:15 AM, Manas Mangaonkar manasmangaonkar@gmail.com wrote:
Fedora is already in glibc 2.28 it is possible to do the > > same approach
TBH I don't really know how that'd be done with the current package,would love to learn.
Please take a look at my slides : https://schd.ws/hosted_files/ossna2017/6b/Boosting_GLIBC_GCC.pdf from last year OSSNA
There is a description of the main idea and how does it work here :
https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=Clear-Linux-NA2017-O...
feel free to ping me for any further questons
regards
On Tue, Aug 28, 2018, 3:09 AM Victor Rodriguez vm.rod25@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Aug 26, 2018 at 12:40 PM, Manas Mangaonkar manasmangaonkar@gmail.com wrote:
Thank you for the blog link victor , interesting read it is.
Fedora is already in glibc 2.28 it is possible to do the same approach
- Manas
On Sun, 26 Aug 2018, 23:03 Victor Rodriguez, vm.rod25@gmail.com wrote: > > On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 10:38 PM, Hayden Barnes thbarnes@icloud.com > wrote: > > Would it be possible to mirror the Clear Linux kernel in copr or a > > third-party dnf repo? > > > > That would allow Fedora to keep it's general purpose kernel but then > > allow performance hounds to install the Clear Linux kernel. > > > > There is something similar already for people who want to use > > upstream > > vanilla kernel. > > > > The Clear Linux performance metrics posted by Phoronix are > > compelling. > > _______________________________________________ > > devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org > > To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org > > Maybe a great blog to read about Clear Linux could be this: > > > > https://clearlinux.org/blogs/transparent-use-library-packages-optimized-inte... > > Regards > > Victor > _______________________________________________ > devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org > To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org > Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html > List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines > List Archives: > > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
devel@lists.stg.fedoraproject.org
-
Chris Murphy -
František Zatloukal -
Hayden Barnes -
Josh Boyer -
Manas Mangaonkar -
Matthew Miller -
Michal Novotny -
Peter Robinson -
Rajeesh K V -
Richard W.M. Jones -
Samuel Sieb -
stan -
Stephen John Smoogen -
Sérgio Basto -
Victor Rodriguez