Linux kernel 6.14 is a big leap forward in performance and Windows compatibility
zdnet.com
zdnet.com
So it's early Monday morning (well - early for me, I'm not really a morning person), and I'd love to have some good excuse for why I didn't do the 6.14 release yesterday on my regular Sunday afternoon release schedule.
I'd like to say that some important last-minute thing came up and delayed things.
But no. It's just pure incompetence.
Because absolutely nothing last-minute happened yesterday, and I was just clearing up some unrelated things in order to be ready for the merge window. And in the process just entirely forgot to actually ever cut the release. D'oh.
RelatableWhile I don't agree with how he conducts himself on the mailing lists; I respect he uses the same language when talking about himself.
Of course, there are some moments, but almost everybody has their moments. When push comes to shove, Linus seems to handle the important things pretty well.
https://lkml.org/lkml/2025/2/23/351
This was a month ago. I wouldn’t stand for this in a company I worked for.
Where do you really feel this message goes too far?
> So next time you want to write an email to complain about rust support: take a look in the mirror.
> Is the problem actually the rust code causing you issue, or is the problem between the keyboard and the chair, and you just want to vent?
Or would you just not communicate that idea? Why / Why not?
Well, I'm glad you're not my lead. I want people to tell me when I'm doing something wrong. It's how I learn and grow.
Some folks need more carrot, some need more stick. I don’t know the actors in this play, but I assume Linus (who presumably does have a mental map for these actors) is choosing to strike a tone which gets the message across without causing lasting damage.
Perhaps GP carries with them Linus’ priors resulting in a different reading of this specific message.
Edit: https://lkml.org/lkml/2025/2/20/2066 here’s a really good example of Linus not taking any shit and doing so professionally
I learned that from Bill Belichick. XD
or sleeveless hoodies?
But I guess the line will be up to taste. I've been on the receiving end of harsher communication that I don't feel was completely uncalled for, too. I certainly can be a stubborn person and sometimes reasonable communication just isn't getting the message across. On the other hand, there are people who basically never do anything to warrant being communicated to like this. It would be ideal if everyone could communicate calmly and always get the message across, but frankly it just doesn't seem to work that way.
It's very possible to be assertive and shut down unconstructive discussions, as Linus has repeatedly shown. Here [0] is a great example of Linus being firm, assertive, calling someone out on their shit.
Otherwise people will go off topic and take whatever meaning they want (like I did with Linus’) comment and you did the same with the word toxic, which you introduced
>main problem has been people who have been forthing at the mouth
:-)
This is a very even-handed response where Linus tells people to calm down, that the purpose of linux-next is to discover problems, and that Rust is not causing all of the problems.
At the very end there is a sentence or two that might be offensive, especially if you have a thin skin or aren't reflective about your own responses, but this is in no way akin to the bombs of the past.
I think you’re wrong about the end, it’s an unnecessary personal attack that’s only purpose is to insult and/or to make Linus feel better. If you remove the last two or three paragraphs it’s a perfectly fine constructive response. With them, it’s a shitty, unnecessary escalation.
I agree the last 2-3 paragraphs could be better but I disagree that's the bar for what's professional, let alone what is reasonable to stand out out of a month's worth of emails. It's also hard to square that message being so horrible by nature of being shitty and just to make Linus feel better - to me, these are more pointed and more personally directed statements than the supposedly problematic discourse they're about (though still relatively mild overall).
We aren't all perfect in communication all the time, even the most ideal professionals. A large part of good discourse is accepting reasonable amounts of people being human and de-escalating smaller perceived slights naturally before declaring the conversation can't be stood for. Jumping at the latter can cause well meaning and well received folks to feel bullied, which is the exact opposite to the goal of trying to keep a professional air to discussion. Hell, some of the times I've been more colorfully told to look in the mirror were the best things which could have been said to me at the time (even if they might not be reasonable things to have heard at other times).
Do you not rink its fair to say that Linus has a track record of provoking that sort of behaviour?
I'd disagree with that as his track record, though you won't find me claiming he is the perfect/ideal/flawless role model in that regard either. In my opinion, overall, he has reasonable and professional track record across the board these last few years (anything prior to that doesn't set the track record in my book). Especially if you read his emails regularly, not just the most popular ones about the most charged discussions he's asked to enter into. If you'd asked me the same question 10 years ago I'd've given a very different answer.
Your point about Linus's behaviour are correct in some sense: other people would make the same point less aggressively. But you aren't making any attempt to balance the scales.
There isn't some other version of Linus lying on the shelf that has the technical decision making record he does, and is also a great diplomat. So the choices are: keep the flawed but highly talented man we have, or discard Linus for someone else who almost certainly will be worse technically, but may be a better wordsmith.
I'd wager most of the people here have jobs that depend on Linus's technical skills. That's certainly true of most people whose day jobs are working on the kernel. They've made their choice, and it's the obvious one. They'll take the man that abuses them for their mistakes over a silver tongued Mr average.
If you don't like that, go and work on your own kernel for Mr average. But if you take that route, be prepared for the fact that no one is going to want to use your kernel because, well, it's average.
> So the choices are: keep the flawed but highly talented man we have, or discard Linus for someone else who almost certainly will be worse technically, but may be a better wordsmith.
I don't think that's true. There's always other options.
It's true that reporting on Linus' emails has a track record of only highlighting the rudest ones, creating this impression in your mind. Anything else is speculation.
Is it worth making absolutist assertions about such a relative topic? Offence is taken as much as it's given, and everyone has a different thickness of skin in these matters.
It’s perfectly possible to be firm and direct without insulting people.
If instead of "Is the problem actually the rust code causing you issue, or is the problem between the keyboard and the chair, and you just want to vent?"
he said "Is the problem actually the rust code causing you issue, or do you just want to vent?" it's perfectly acceptable. The snide insults are petty, unprofessional, and unnecessary.
> only someone profoundly lacking in it could be bothered by a message like this
I could just as easily say that anyone who doesn't see that should look in a mirror and see if the see an ass staring back at them, but I wouldn't. When I read this, I see someone blowing off steam and knowing they can get away with it. I respect linus, and as I've said elsewhere he's perfectly capable of handling himself without resorting to passive aggressive insults.
Moreover, I can very much see how those precise words could be said verbally, in person, in a completely disarming, effective manner - by using particular pacing, tone, gestures, a wink, etc. Whether Linus would do that is another matter - but your comment was talking about how it would be inappropriate anywhere.
Businesses are better and more efficient places with blunt honesty.
On Thu, Jul 4, 2024 at 8:52 PM Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
> Jason. This smells. It's BS.
On Thu, 4 Jul 2024 at 11:57, Jason A. Donenfeld <Jason@zx2c4.com> wrote:
> It's not BS. And that's not a real argument from you, but rather is something else.
On Thu, 4 Jul 2024 at 12:19, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
> Bah. I guess I'll have to walk through the patch series once again.
> I'm still not thrilled about it. But I'll give it another go.
> Linus
The fundamental thing that people never seem to understand in the "Linus is being an asshole" vs "I love Linus, he tells it like he is and to manage a project you have to be willing to do that!" debate is that it is completely unnecessary to speak at all about someone's person on a mailing list like lkml.
"This code sucks!" - no. "This code does not meet the linux kernel's coding conventions, has race conditions, and this algorithm could likely be implemented in a far more performant way."
"You're just WRONG" - no. "The position that you're being forced to learn a new programming language is not correct. You have not been asked to write or even understand Rust."
I think the people who think 'you have to be that way to manage/lead' have never been under a good manager or leader and I daresay that a lot of people in technical supervisory and management positions unfortunately grew up respecting Linus and thinking his behavior was how you "get things done", not realizing that Linus's behavior almost certainly kept a lot of people from risking contributing and if anything has hurt the Linux kernel project - and kept people from feeling they could safely point out problems in someone's code because
T'so is a great example; a huge ego. As a result, people simply have gone elsewhere to work on filesystems. The ext filesystem(s) were not terribly reliable or tolerant of real-world situations, is still not very performant, and has evolved at a glacial pace consistently lagging behind its peers.
And I'm only 50% ironic/joking.
Currently, I've been putting off a long report for a few days and it's because I'm trying to balance a number of conclusions, tones, etc. When I'm ready, I'm ready.
... Which also would have been relatable, and valid if we're being honest.
> please don't hype NTSYNC. yes it has better compatibility than ESYNC and FSYNC, yes it's marginally faster in selected title. The phoronix article reports benchmarks with WINESYNC vs NTSYNC, the gains are there only if you were not already running FSYNC (on by default in most titles running under proton).
> By overhyping features they ultimately end up underdelivering because people expect insane gains that were never there to begin with.
Surely we can do better than YouTube comments?
> For Valve's Proton however, don't go expecting much here with ntsync. As Valve developer Pierre-Loup Griffais replied to a user on Bluesky to note:
> We already include fsync, which should be as fast or faster as ntsync. We developed ntsync as a general solution that'd be acceptable in upstream Wine, but there's no urgency in including it in the Deck / SteamOS kernel.
What's the process like for getting such a low-level primitive added to Linux? Especially a low-level primitive that 1) exist basically just to emulate behavior of a completely different kernel, and 2) is only needed for a subset of users to play games?
I'm not complaining, just curious. I would assume a patch to add the above would be heavily scrutinized. Is it because the popularity of the Steam Deck / proton?
The idea here is that wine/proton can interact with this module directly if it’s loaded, or continue to use their wrappers around existing fsync if not.
I expect that means a little less scrutiny since if it segs the user can choose to not load it and achieve a stable OS.
Easier to find if you look slightly away from that part of the text.
From Jan 2024:
[0]: https://bsky.app/profile/plagman.bsky.social/post/3lkp26xmco...
https://www.reddit.com/r/MiniPCs/comments/1htxoi6/beelink_mi...
Did you add backports or recompile? I think N100 may be supported by stable but not N150.
N100 has been there for a while longer and I've seen guides in the internet for a long time with no specific requirements.
I'm running ubuntu 24.04 with nothing extra, runs out-of-the-box (assuming that if it's a VM, you properly do the card's PCI passthrough).
I tested nvtop and it works, it shows GPU% usage when I start a movie in jellyfin and change the quality to force trascoding.
https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/CAHk-=wg7TO09Si5tTPyhdrLLvyYtVm...
Funny that Linus himself doesn't consider much in the release noteworthy besides the GPU stuff, yet the submission article goes on about "leaps", "big news" and "major step".
If there was anything really significant from the past week's changelog, it would likely have been reason to delay the stable release for at least another week.
Or the upcoming breaking GPIO changes. That will be a huge minefield
[1]: https://gwern.net/doc/cs/security/2001-12-02-treginaldgibbon...
To me, anything that emulates windows primitives is a bad thing. Again these changes being pushed by Microsoft make me glad the BSDs exist.
Lets hope the BSDs can continue staying independent of Large Corporations.
1. Ability to play any video game
2. Compatibility with hardware (e.g. one of my friends is booting windows temporarily as his graphics card has an issue on Linux)
3. Usability/looks. This is subjective but for people used to Windows for the last couple decades people often find Linux more difficult to use and honestly uglier (Linux is customizable but most people I know are not confident enough to go far from the defaults).
This is just my friends, some of whom are engineers and some are normal people when it comes to technical ability, but currently a lot of them want to like Linux but have specific requirements holding them back.
I’m genuinely curious why you think this post is appropriate or beneficial for this topic or even this subthread? Linux isn’t a windows clone; everyone knows that.
If that's a concern they really shouldn't use the BSD license. Imagine what will happen if the BSDs become popular.
- adoption of NTSYNC may distort the technical roadmap of Linux. That's arguable, it comes down to technical details.
- we should ask game vendors to support Linux, not enable them to not support Linux. Unfortunately that ship has sailed and we already know that Linux gaming is not a market they care about.
- Windows and Microsoft are bad and Linux is good. That's an emotional argument. When MS was truly anti-Linux, this association would rightly trigger suspicion. But MS is not behind this effort.
Not sure what is left.
https://freebsdfoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/Run...
"The division owns intellectual property for some of the most popular, best-selling, and highest-grossing media franchises of all time, including Call of Duty, Candy Crush, Warcraft, Halo, Minecraft, and The Elder Scrolls."
https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/topic/xbox-cloud-gaming-...
But you're just nitpicking looking for an argument. So, goodbye.
It's low revenue, fairly high expense, and the relevance of "which operating system do you use" is going down rapidly (see linux gaming getting good with MS's help). Businesses.. sure they'll keep using windows and paying for it, since they already have a huge amount of legacy systems/software and IT procedures/institutional knowledge - like IBM still doing mainframes - but consumers don't seem to care about that.
Most people basically seem to use their computer to run a browser, maybe some games, and maybe some office suite stuff, OS doesn't matter too much anymore.
I don't see how improving compatibility is a bad thing in itself, unless it breaks native functionality, which it doesn't.
To me, dogma is a bad thing.
> these changes being pushed by Microsoft
I don't think Microsoft has anything to do with NTSYNC. Its goal is to make running Windows games on Linux easier.
I have some bad news for you on what MacOS and iOS are originally based on.