Ubuntu Studio, -rt and 2.6.27

Cory K. coryisatm at ubuntu.com
Tue Sep 2 16:59:03 UTC 2008


Ben Collins wrote:
> Cory K. wrote:
>> Please excuse me if I can't speak with as much technical aptitude as I
>> would like. I'm simply trying to stimulate conversation.
>>
>> Ok. There have been a couple of reasons why the -rt kernel has had
>> issues this cycle.
>>
>>     * Alessio has had to fight upstream for support of .26.
>>     * This work has landed late in the cycle.
>>     * Alession has had personal issues.
>>     * There has been a perceived lack of help from the kernel team to
>>       deal with how the kernels are done now. (I cite no response to
>>       this thread:
>>      
>> https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/kernel-team/2008-August/002871.html)
>
> I believe I had told you or Alessio that lrm was moving to dkms, which
> means it wouldn't be necessary. Lrm should not be considered a blocker
> for -rt, since the drivers in it are, for the most part, supported in
> stock kernel anyway. Nvidia and fglrx are separately packaged using dkms.

Sure. From what I can tell he isn't understanding the new interaction
with DKMS atm.

>>     * We have now moved to 2.6.27
>
> Irrelevant. The -rt kernel was delayed well before we made this move.
> This may delay it further, but it in no part brought -rt to the issues
> it is trying to resolve right now.

If we were at .26 still we would be *just about* golden now. It's in the
archive now. Though the source was NBS'ed.

>>     * The kernels are managed different in this cycle.
>
> I had stated to you and Alessio that if he were to provide a patch, I
> would help with the packaging end of it. That was never done.
>
>> I am not at all saying this the kernel teams fault. This is an
>> unfortunate combination of events. There was also no response to this:
>> https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-devel/2008-August/026184.html I
>> think, in part, because Alessio can't provide a patch against .27.
>> (Again, not the kernel teams fault)
>
> I didn't want a 2.6.27 patch, I wanted to see his current patch so we
> can look at what sort of conflicts and issues we will have trying to
> forward port it.

I don't know if this helps. http://rt.et.redhat.com/download Latest
being "patch-2.6.26.3-rt3.bz2"

>> So, atm, it *looks* like our only option is to base off of 2.6.26. We
>> have a kernel in Universe now (though the source was recently NBS'ed)
>> but lrm/lum/drivers and such are looking to be issues.
>
> There is no lum and lrm isn't an issue (even if it doesn't go to dkms,
> I don't think it can be considered a serious problem shipping -rt
> without those drivers).
>
>> I'll let Alessio chime in but I'm opening this up to the wider kernel
>> community for options/opinions.
>
> Please do. We can't help if there is no communication from the person
> handling this. I appreciate that you are taking up the cause, but
> Alessio needs to take part.
>
>> How has -zen dealt with this for instance?
>
> Xen domU is built into our current kernel. I don't think there are any
> plans to incorporate a dom0 kernel for intrepid.
>

In the end, I'm seeing reports that .26 has serious issues with midi and
such so we're thinking about shipping -generic and work on -rt in the
meantime. Maybe go for a SRU once things are in better shape.

I'll email Alessio once again to chime in.

-Cory K.




More information about the kernel-team mailing list