Greg Kroah Hartman on the Linux Kernel
Google Tech Talks
June, 5 2008
ABSTRACT
The Linux Kernel, who is developing it, how they are doing it,
and why you should care.
This talk describes the rate of development for the Linux
kernel, and how the development model is set up to handle such a
large and diverse developer population and huge rate of change.
It will detail who is doing the work, and what companies, if
any, are sponsering it. Finally, it will go into why companies
like Google, and any other that uses or depends on Linux, should
care about this development. Lots of numbers and pretty graphs
will be shown to keep the audience awake.
Speaker: Greg Kroah Hartman
Greg Kroah-Hartman is a Linux kernel maintainer for the USB,
driver core, sysfs, and debugfs portions of the kernel as well
as being one half of the -stable kernel release team. He
currently works for Novell as a Fellow doing various kernel
related things and has written a few books from O’Reilly about
Linux development in the past.
Related Posts
25 Comments »
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL
Bill Gates doesn’t work for Microsoft anymore, and why should he care? He’s wealthy enough to provide for himself and his family x10000000000.
Great talk — Greg is obviously very knowledgeable, and he’s a positive force in the community. He’s poured a ton of effort into the kernel, and he actually likes to document things (Linux Kernel in a Nutshell, LDD3ed, LWN articles, etc.). Respect, man. BTW Greg, it’s “ostensibly” NOT “obstensively”
Greg knows alot about the kernel. Believe me, I talked to him in person.
I contributed a little to the kernel but I am working on getting some device drivers to Greg and trying to get that into the future kernels but I think it will go on minor revisions.
toilet? What are you even talking about??
Go Linux!Billy gays should care about our power.When Linux will get rid of M$`s fake OS`es billy will run away without clothes by toilet.Run Billy,RUN!
Could you please annotate the off-screen questions and comments
Go Andrew!! lol
Wow 49min : )
This guy needs a beer before trying to give a talk.
How to not give a presentation!
Quit moving around.
Quit waving your hands, you’re not steve jobs.
Quit rambling.
Write out the presentation.
wow, that guy that looks like kevin smith looks like a real ****..
Cut off IBM , mean IBM is putting alot of Biometrics in the Code and that is a Big Problem
I have no idea. All I know is that it allways happens when the window border is moving extensively. And by window border, I mean it alone. For example, when you minimize a window, you should see a black one. With xvidcap, when you select the area, the frame is red. So if I resize that red thing quickly or if it exceeds a certain height/width, the sys freezes. Next time I’ll look at the logs
Heh, strange. Isn’t there any error file in xorg? I haven’t had any GUI related crashes so I haven’t poked around there so much.
Incorporating everything in the kernel might be fast, but it’s on the expense of stability and security, something I don’t like.
Actually, on GNU/Linux, my system freezes when my display driver fails (BSD too). Why? I don’t know. I should be able to get tty, but I don’t. BSOD won’t go from win, since they incorporate display GUI in kernel (it is fast tho).
But if you go to wiki, you’ll get Win NT kernel is hybrid. That’s meaningless. Hybrid means nothing. That’s probably 90% monolithic & 10% micro-like.
Everything is “hybrid”. But I was talking about real hybrids. Linux is closer, but I meant those more micro-like ones.
I don’t have too much knowledge of the Windows core, but I think it’s an extreme example of a monolithic kernel (Even IE is integrated in the kernel).
BSOD’s are caused by (usually) bugs in device drivers, whereas in Linux and *BSD, only the drivers fail, not the entire system.
I admit, Linux does its job very well in regards its architecture. To tell you the truth, it might be me reading some of what Tannenbaum says that got me thinking this way. I do see the logic in hybrid kernels*, especially the new designs. But projects fail… I don’t like monopoly, and I think the microkernel architecture if planned carefully can make a _sort of_ an ultimate OS that may be modded in almost any imaginable way.
*if Windows’ core could be called one, then Linux certainly is one
I agree that Linux is sort of the “monopoly” in the open source world, other projects doesn’t get as much attention as Linux.
I recon you have tried a microkernel OS, if so, is it good? As I understand it, multitasking is a bit more “difficult” (In the terms of speed and stability).
Though I really like the idea that each device driver isn’t included in the kernel itself, Linux and *BSD has traces of that (Graphic cards for instance).
You were the one who replied to me. It is courteous to reply with a response.
Leave me alone!!!
GTFO means nothing to me. i tend to use proper english. not all that text nonsense.
It’s actually a command.
wow, how very civilized of you. thank you for your opinion.
bexy you stupid bitch, GTFO!
wow i wish i understood all this rubbish
Wah. Nevermind. I still think microkernels are superior, and that it’s easier to code (once the microkernel is done) specific services with compatible message passing, then extracting + (re)coding + reintegrating modules in a monolithic kernel.
Even more so with stripping the kernel & modding it (eg for an embedded stuff).