Welcome!
Important information
-- Spectre and Meltdown vulnerabilities
-- Change in MX sources

News
-- MX Linux on social media: here
-- Mepis support still here

Current releases
-- MX-17.1 Final release info here
-- antiX-17 release info here

New users
-- Please read this first, and don't forget to add system and hardware information to posts!
-- Here are the Forum Rules

kernel options

Help for Current Versions of MX
Message
Author
caprea
Forum Regular
Forum Regular
Posts: 131
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2014 7:01 am

Re: kernel options

#111 Post by caprea » Thu Feb 22, 2018 7:10 pm

The out-of-the-box working kernels

Code: Select all

sudo cat /boot/config-4.9.77-antix.1-amd64-smp | grep CONFIG_RCU_NOCB_CPU 
CONFIG_RCU_NOCB_CPU=y
# CONFIG_RCU_NOCB_CPU_NONE is not set
# CONFIG_RCU_NOCB_CPU_ZERO is not set
CONFIG_RCU_NOCB_CPU_ALL=y


$ sudo cat /boot/config-4.10.5-antix.3-amd64-smp | grep CONFIG_RCU_NOCB_CPU 
CONFIG_RCU_NOCB_CPU=y
# CONFIG_RCU_NOCB_CPU_NONE is not set
# CONFIG_RCU_NOCB_CPU_ZERO is not set
CONFIG_RCU_NOCB_CPU_ALL=y
The new kernels since 4.12 maybe, which need a bootparameter rcu_nocbs=x-xx

Code: Select all

sudo cat /boot/config-4.15.3-antix.1-amd64-smp | grep CONFIG_RCU_NOCB_CPU 
CONFIG_RCU_NOCB_CPU=y
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/ke ... 0602c25764

It looks like a kernel-bug for the ryzen

viewtopic.php?f=40&t=44053
Last edited by caprea on Tue Mar 06, 2018 6:06 pm, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
golden45
Forum Regular
Forum Regular
Posts: 405
Joined: Mon Sep 25, 2006 11:24 am

Re: kernel options

#112 Post by golden45 » Thu Feb 22, 2018 8:43 pm

Finding mainline kernels is easy I installed ukuu and ran the program,It gives all kernels available-even experimental ones.I have even used ukuu to remove the older kernels after seeing which they were from mxlinux 17.Thanks john

User avatar
entropyfoe
Forum Regular
Forum Regular
Posts: 847
Joined: Thu Apr 19, 2007 11:42 am

Re: kernel options

#113 Post by entropyfoe » Fri Feb 23, 2018 11:55 pm

Stevo, I guess the time to build depends on the exact configuration and modules etc, so how to standardize?

Here is a link I found for a similar system, where they describe what they compile.
https://openbenchmarking.org/result/170 ... -RYZEN5194

That is a Ryzen 1600, I have a 1600x, that has a higher clock, and more advanced power gradations and boost vs core number control, it is 3.6 GHz It would be maybe 12% faster.
That would be about 75 minutes in his test.
Asus Prime 370X-Pro
AMD Ryzen 1600X (12 threads @ 3.6 GHz)
16 Gig DDR4 3200 (G Skill)
Nvidia -MSI GeForce GT 710 fanless
Samsung 960 NVMe SSD nvme0n1 P1-3=MX-17.1, P4=MX 18 betas
1TB SSD sda1= Data, 2TB WD =backups
on-board ethernet & sound

User avatar
golden45
Forum Regular
Forum Regular
Posts: 405
Joined: Mon Sep 25, 2006 11:24 am

Re: kernel options

#114 Post by golden45 » Sat Feb 24, 2018 11:31 pm


caprea
Forum Regular
Forum Regular
Posts: 131
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2014 7:01 am

Re: kernel options

#115 Post by caprea » Wed Mar 07, 2018 11:10 am

@entropyfoe
Because it's not really a "realease candidate feedback" issue
I will answer this here
The rcu_nocbs=1-11 parameter does only work on kernels which have the rcu_nocbs-flag set to yes.
This is not the case by the default 4.15.0-1-amd64-mx kernel

Code: Select all

$  sudo cat /boot/config-4.15.0-1-amd64 | grep CONFIG_RCU_NOCB_CPU 
There's no output

So you have three options to get the newest protection against spectre/meltdown

1.Try the 4.15.0-1-amd64-mx kernel without the boot parameter,just for to make it sure.(But I think it will crash during idle)
2. Stay with the antix-kernels and download the newest 4.15.5-antix.1-amd64-smp with synaptic.It's not in the Package-Installer(only 4.15.3,I don't know why) and use the bootparameter.

Code: Select all

$  sudo cat /boot/config-4.15.5-antix.1-amd64-smp | grep CONFIG_RCU_NOCB_CPU 
CONFIG_RCU_NOCB_CPU=y
3.Try the liqourix-kernel -4.15.0-6.1-liquorix-amd64, whis is in the Package-Installer, with the boot-parameter. It also has the flag set to yes.

Code: Select all

$  sudo cat /boot/config-4.15.0-6.1-liquorix-amd64 | grep CONFIG_RCU_NOCB_CPU 
CONFIG_RCU_NOCB_CPU=y

User avatar
entropyfoe
Forum Regular
Forum Regular
Posts: 847
Joined: Thu Apr 19, 2007 11:42 am

Re: kernel options

#116 Post by entropyfoe » Wed Mar 07, 2018 12:25 pm

caprea,

As usual, your comments are right on target and useful.

So the tree options, option 1 seems like it won't work (it will be unstable).
Option two sounds good, I have good luck with the antix kernels.
I think it would be useful to replace the antix 4.15.3 in the package installer with the latest patched version4.15.5-antix.

I looked in synaptc last night but did not see the 4.15.5. I will check again tonight.

The liquorix is also an option with the boot parameter. I have the latest nvidia, so there should not be any video problems.
Thanks
Asus Prime 370X-Pro
AMD Ryzen 1600X (12 threads @ 3.6 GHz)
16 Gig DDR4 3200 (G Skill)
Nvidia -MSI GeForce GT 710 fanless
Samsung 960 NVMe SSD nvme0n1 P1-3=MX-17.1, P4=MX 18 betas
1TB SSD sda1= Data, 2TB WD =backups
on-board ethernet & sound

User avatar
Stevo
Forum Veteran
Forum Veteran
Posts: 16986
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2006 8:07 pm

Re: kernel options

#117 Post by Stevo » Wed Mar 07, 2018 3:41 pm

entropyfoe wrote:Stevo, I guess the time to build depends on the exact configuration and modules etc, so how to standardize?

Here is a link I found for a similar system, where they describe what they compile.
https://openbenchmarking.org/result/170 ... -RYZEN5194

That is a Ryzen 1600, I have a 1600x, that has a higher clock, and more advanced power gradations and boost vs core number control, it is 3.6 GHz It would be maybe 12% faster.
That would be about 75 minutes in his test.
That's slower than my dual-core laptop, so i would guess it's actually ~75 seconds in the Phoronix testing.

User avatar
entropyfoe
Forum Regular
Forum Regular
Posts: 847
Joined: Thu Apr 19, 2007 11:42 am

Re: kernel options

#118 Post by entropyfoe » Wed Mar 07, 2018 3:49 pm

Yup, as I said I am ignorant in this area, though interested in learning. I did notice that the bar graph had no units (seconds of minutes), so I incorrectly assumed minutes. If seconds, wow, that seems like not such a bottleneck.
Asus Prime 370X-Pro
AMD Ryzen 1600X (12 threads @ 3.6 GHz)
16 Gig DDR4 3200 (G Skill)
Nvidia -MSI GeForce GT 710 fanless
Samsung 960 NVMe SSD nvme0n1 P1-3=MX-17.1, P4=MX 18 betas
1TB SSD sda1= Data, 2TB WD =backups
on-board ethernet & sound

User avatar
Stevo
Forum Veteran
Forum Veteran
Posts: 16986
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2006 8:07 pm

Re: kernel options

#119 Post by Stevo » Thu Mar 08, 2018 4:56 pm

entropyfoe wrote:Yup, as I said I am ignorant in this area, though interested in learning. I did notice that the bar graph had no units (seconds of minutes), so I incorrectly assumed minutes. If seconds, wow, that seems like not such a bottleneck.
Looking over some comments in the thread, that seems the seconds are just from the Phoronix test suite. In real life use, 75 seconds seems to translate more to something like 7.5 minutes for a kernel compile, using all cores.

kb50
Forum Novice
Forum  Novice
Posts: 20
Joined: Sun Nov 26, 2017 9:51 pm

Re: kernel options

#120 Post by kb50 » Sat Mar 10, 2018 10:03 am

Is there an automated, or simple way to purge older kernels just to eliminate grub entries?
I have it running on 4.15 all good but see no reason to keep 4.13 anymore.
Perhaps into the future, there will be a purging tool as part of a maintenance type GUI or something.
.Thanks.

Post Reply

Return to “MX Help”