HackerReposA FIELD GUIDE TO OPEN SOURCE
ProSponsor the shelf♧ 0
← Back to top all-time
torvalds
linux
C2010–2026
torvalds / linux

linux

Linux kernel source tree

Systems & Infrastructure
Explore on GitHubRead Hacker News discussions
742Distinct people
940Mentions
5Explicit recommenders
255.5KGitHub stars
REPOSITORY AT A GLANCE

What to know before exploring

What it is

Linux kernel source tree

GitHub

Where it is used

  • Ubuntu — Ubuntu uses the Linux kernel at the core of the operating system to manage and control hardware resources like I/O, memory, and CPU. Source
  • Android — Android uses the upstream Linux LTS kernel as the base of its Android kernel. Google then adds Android-specific patches to produce Android Common Kernels. Source
  • 1 more documented example

What people are saying

For critical applications, I for one would like to know the story behind a commit, preferably in the commit itself and not a reference to an external system like idk, Jira. My…

Cthulhu_ used a recommendation phrase. 5 indexed comments match. This is a phrase match, not a verdict.

No classified warning is attached to this page. Read the discussions before treating silence as approval.

Also in these discussions

Mentioned in the same Hacker News threads. That is not proof they are substitutes.

This week on Hacker News

Nov 8–Nov 15 UTC · Direct repository links and separately labeled related project stories. Indexed through 11/15/2026, 2:59:53 AM UTC.

GitHub Down Again? direct repository linkCritical

Users report that GitHub's official status page inaccurately claims all systems are operational while widespread 504 gateway timeouts and download failures disrupt CI/CD pipelines and software distribution. The conversation highlights significant frustration with the platform's reliability and transparency, leading to debates about migrating to self-hosted or alternative services like Codeberg.

57 readable replies · Supporting reply 1 · Supporting reply 2 · Supporting reply 3 · Supporting reply 4

Mentions over time

HN mentions by year940 dated mentions

Observed mentions: 2010-07-15 18:39:05 UTC to 2026-10-29 13:46:22 UTC.

02550751002010-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2011-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 0 submissions, 1 comments20102011-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2012-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 13 mentions; 3 submissions, 10 comments2012-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2013-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 24 mentions; 2 submissions, 22 comments2013-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2014-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 23 mentions; 5 submissions, 18 comments2014-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2015-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 31 mentions; 7 submissions, 24 comments2015-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2016-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 42 mentions; 4 submissions, 38 comments2016-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2017-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 55 mentions; 9 submissions, 46 comments2017-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2018-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 72 mentions; 8 submissions, 64 comments2018-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 57 mentions; 8 submissions, 49 comments20182019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 66 mentions; 6 submissions, 60 comments2020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 80 mentions; 6 submissions, 74 comments2021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 91 mentions; 8 submissions, 83 comments2022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 104 mentions; 8 submissions, 96 comments2023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2024-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 76 mentions; 3 submissions, 73 comments2024-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2025-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 76 mentions; 6 submissions, 70 comments2025-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2026-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 72 mentions; 7 submissions, 65 comments2026-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2027-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 57 mentions; 8 submissions, 49 comments. Incomplete calendar period.2026*

* An incomplete calendar period is marked with an outlined bar. Its count is not directly comparable with a full period.

Counts come from the repository’s dated source evidence. Index cutoff: 2026-11-02 08:16:59 UTC.

View mention counts and date ranges
UTC ranges include their start and exclude their end. Select a period to filter the source evidence.
PeriodStart (UTC)End (exclusive, UTC)MentionsSubmissionsComments
20102010-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2011-01-01 00:00:00 UTC101
20112011-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2012-01-01 00:00:00 UTC13310
20122012-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2013-01-01 00:00:00 UTC24222
20132013-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2014-01-01 00:00:00 UTC23518
20142014-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2015-01-01 00:00:00 UTC31724
20152015-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2016-01-01 00:00:00 UTC42438
20162016-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2017-01-01 00:00:00 UTC55946
20172017-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2018-01-01 00:00:00 UTC72864
20182018-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC57849
20192019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC66660
20202020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC80674
20212021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC91883
20222022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC104896
20232023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2024-01-01 00:00:00 UTC76373
20242024-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2025-01-01 00:00:00 UTC76670
20252025-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2026-01-01 00:00:00 UTC72765
2026 (partial)2026-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2027-01-01 00:00:00 UTC57849

What Hacker News says

76 sources
rdtsc·Dec 20, 2023
The commit [1] was eventually reverted [2] [1] https://github.com/torvalds/linux/commit/6f98a4bfee72c22f50a... [2] https://github.com/torvalds/linux/commit/0313bc278dac7cd9ce8... > "This causes a large number of qemu boot test failures for various architectures (arm, m68k, microblaze, sparc32, xtensa are the ones I observed). Common denominator is that boot hangs at 'Saving random seed:'" This isn't hugely unexpected - we tried it, it failed, so now we'll revert it.
In Uniting the Linux random-number devices (2022)
frankjr·Dec 10, 2023
Here's my understanding so far: In the upstream Linux kernel there were two fixes posted months from each other, one for direct io [0] and the other one for ext4 [1]. The ext4 one was marked for backport to stable (CC: stable@vger.kernel.org), the other was not. The problem is that these commits depend on each other for things to work properly. If you have both, you're fine. If you have only the backported one, you have a problem. Which versions are affected? We know for sure that 6.1.64 is affected, 6.1.55 is not (because it doesn't have the commit). As of right now, 6.1.64 is still marked as "stable" in Debian [2] but if you actually try to install it from the official mirrors (deb.debian.org), you will get error 403. The fix is included in version 6.1.66 which will soon be available. The issue seems to be only highlighted in the contex
Read the rest
t of Debian but it is not specific to it. The issue is/was in the official upstream release. [0] https://github.com/torvalds/linux/commit/936e114a245b6e38e0d... [1] https://github.com/torvalds/linux/commit/91562895f8030cb9a04... [2] https://packages.debian.org/source/stable/linux
In Linux: Ext4 data corruption in 6.1.64-1
mlochbaum·Nov 30, 2023
A solution used in the Linux kernel[0] is to use a struct with the packed attribute, which implies the fields aren't necessarily aligned. Simplifying, I think this macro should work the same in gcc and similar: apply to any pointer to get something that behaves as *p but will read or write as unaligned. #define unaligned(P) (((struct { typeof(*(P)) x; } __attribute__((packed))*)(P))->x) [0] https://github.com/torvalds/linux/blob/7b9e664beb237d90bc600...
In Unaligned accesses in C/C++: what, why and solutions to do it properly
chrishill89·Nov 28, 2023
I’ve started using a sort of hanging quotation style for block quotes in commit messages. From commit 3927bbe9a4: “ This matches the behavior of COMMIT_EDITMSG, which stays around in case of error. Two spaces, one quote character, one space, then the quote on that indentation. This might look a bit off with a proportional font. Linus Torvalds[1] uses a kind of hanging quote for his merged pull requests. But it looks a bit too subtle since the quotation character hugs the first character. [1] https://github.com/torvalds/linux/commit/5b2b1173a93fa056b45...
In The `hanging-punctuation property` in CSS
zygentoma·Nov 14, 2023
This article is clickbait and in no way has the kernel been hardcoded to a maximum of 8 cores. If you read the commit [0], you can see, that a /certain/ scaling factor for scheduling can scale linearly or logarithmically with the number of cores and for calculating this scaling factor, the number is capped to 8. This has nothing to do with the number of cores that can actually be used. [0] https://github.com/torvalds/linux/commit/acb4a848da821a095ae...
In The Linux kernel has been accidentally hardcoded to a maximum of 8 cores
matheusmoreira·Nov 7, 2023
> libc isn't really getting in the way here. It depends. For the standard set of system calls, the libc is pretty great. For Linux-specific features, it could take years for glibc to gain support, if it ever does. All the libcs will get in the way if you try to use something like the clone system call: https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10311 > Ulrich Drepper 2009-06-22 19:35:54 UTC > If you use clone() you're on your own. My obsession with Linux system calls started years ago when I read about an episode where glibc literally got into Linux's way. The LWN wrote extensively about the tale of the getrandom system call and the quest to get glibc to support it: https://lwn.net/Articles/711013/ A kernel hacker wrote in an email: > maybe the kernel developers should support a libinux.a library that would allow us to bypass glibc w
Read the rest
hen they are being non-helpful That made a lot of sense to me. I took that concept and kind of ran with it. Started a liblinux project, essentially a libc with nothing in it but the thinnest possible system call wrappers. Researched quite a bit about glibc's attitude towards Linux to justify it: https://github.com/matheusmoreira/liblinux#why The more I used this stuff, the more I enjoyed it. I was writing freestanding C and interfacing directly with the kernel. The code was so clean. No libc baggage anywhere, not even errno. And I knew this could do literally anything when I wrote a little freestanding program to print my terminal window dimensions. When I did that I knew I could write code to mount disks too if I really wanted to. I was talking to the kernel. Eventually I discovered Linux was already doing the same thing with their own nolibc.h file which they were already using in their own tools. It was a single file back then, by now it's become a sprawling directory full of code: https://github.com/torvalds/linux/tree/master/tools/include/... Even asked Greg Kroah-Hartman on reddit about it once: https://old.reddit.com/r/linux/comments/fx5e4v/im_greg_kroah... Since the kernel was already developing their own awesome headers, I decided to drop liblinux and start lone instead. :)
In A standalone zero-dependency Lisp for Linux

Showing the 15 most recent of 76 sources. Enable JavaScript to search and browse every indexed mention.

MAKE YOURSELF AT HOME

A few shortcuts

/
Search the collection
?
Open this guide
Esc
Close dialogs and navigation

Your saved repositories and interests stay in this browser.