One of the topics of ongoing interest in the kernel community is that of maintaining quality. It is trivially obvious that we need to maintain and even improve quality. It is less obvious how best to do so. One broad approach that has found some real success is to increase the visibility of various aspects of the kernel.

Anyone who has read many of my blog entries or articles will know that I'm a great fan of code quality metrics. By code quality metrics, I am referring to coding standards, best practices, complexity, but also to other associated statistics such as the number of unit tests run and the level of code coverage.

After the release of Linux 2.6.27, kernel developers are currently busily integrating patches for the next kernel version into the main development branch of Linux. This usually involves discarding some old code and adding new code though on balance, there are usually more new lines than old ones, making the kernel grow continually.

Several changes to the X86 and KVM code are to speed up the kernel's own hypervisor. The kernel developers once again revised and considerably extended the still emerging tracing infrastructure.

There are dark areas of the kernel where only the bravest hackers dare to tread. Places where the code is twisted, the requirements are complex, and everything depends on ancient code which has seen little change over the years because even the most qualified developers fear the consequences. Arguably, no part of the kernel is darker and scarier than the serial terminal (TTY) code.

The Linux Foundation (LF) has posted a ten-minute video interview with kernel coordinator Linus Torvalds. Held during the Linux Foundation's recent Linux Kernel Summit, the interview reveals the Linux founder speaking out on issues ranging from kernel/userland interactions to why Linux has so many interfaces.

A U.S. Department of Homeland Security-sponsored project has not only discovered that the quality of open source software code has improved significantly over the past two years, it has debunked a widely held assumption that longer function strings within source code are associated with an increased number of code defects.

Every once in a while, an article or post will appear, claiming that Linux is just not good enough for everyday use. The reason?

All communities develop rituals over time. One of the enduring linux-kernel rituals is the regular heated discussion on development processes and kernel quality. To an outside observer, these events can give the impression that the whole enterprise is about to come crashing down