Linus Torvalds Slams RISC-V Patches as "Garbage," Blocks Linux 6.17 Inclusion
Linux creator Linus Torvalds delivered a scathing rejection of proposed RISC-V architecture changes for the upcoming Linux 6.17 kernel, condemning the late submissions as "garbage" and highlighting the ongoing challenges facing the open-source processor architecture's integration into the mainline kernel.
The Harsh Reality of Kernel Development
In a characteristically blunt message to the Linux Kernel Mailing List (LKML), Torvalds didn't mince words when addressing the RISC-V maintainers' last-minute patch submissions. The Linux founder's rejection wasn't just about timing—it was a fundamental critique of code quality and development practices that have plagued RISC-V submissions in recent kernel cycles.
"This is not how kernel development works," Torvalds stated, emphasizing that the merge window operates on strict deadlines for good reason. The rejected patches, which aimed to introduce new RISC-V features and optimizations, arrived well after the established submission deadline, forcing Torvalds to make an example of what he considers unacceptable development practices.
RISC-V's Uphill Battle
The rejection represents a significant setback for RISC-V, the open-source instruction set architecture that has gained momentum as an alternative to proprietary designs from ARM and Intel. Despite backing from major technology companies and growing adoption in embedded systems, RISC-V continues to struggle with kernel integration challenges.
This isn't the first time RISC-V patches have faced scrutiny. Previous kernel cycles have seen similar issues with code quality, documentation gaps, and rushed submissions. The pattern suggests deeper organizational problems within the RISC-V development community that extend beyond simple timing issues.
The Broader Implications
Torvalds' rejection sends a clear message about kernel development standards that extends far beyond RISC-V. The Linux kernel, powering everything from smartphones to supercomputers, maintains its stability and reliability through rigorous quality controls and strict adherence to development processes.
The incident highlights several critical issues:
Quality Over Speed: The pressure to ship new features quickly often conflicts with the meticulous testing and review processes that kernel development requires. Torvalds' rejection reinforces that there are no shortcuts in kernel development.
Process Discipline: The merge window exists to provide predictable development cycles. Late submissions disrupt this carefully orchestrated process, potentially introducing instability into one of the world's most important software projects.
Architecture Maturity: RISC-V's struggles with kernel integration may reflect the broader challenges facing a relatively young processor architecture trying to compete with established players.
Industry Impact
The rejection has immediate consequences for hardware manufacturers and developers banking on RISC-V adoption. Companies planning products around the rejected features will need to adjust their timelines, potentially delaying product launches or forcing them to work with older kernel versions.
For the broader RISC-V ecosystem, this represents a credibility challenge. If the architecture can't maintain consistent, high-quality kernel support, it may struggle to gain traction in critical applications where stability and long-term support are paramount.
Looking Forward
The RISC-V maintainers now face a crucial period for redemption. They must demonstrate improved development practices, better coordination, and higher code quality standards if they want to avoid similar rejections in future kernel cycles.
Industry observers note that this kind of tough love from Torvalds, while harsh, often leads to improved practices. Previous architectures that faced similar criticism have emerged stronger, with better development processes and higher-quality contributions.
Key Takeaways
Linus Torvalds' rejection of the RISC-V patches for Linux 6.17 serves as a stark reminder that even promising technologies must adhere to established quality and process standards. For RISC-V, this setback presents an opportunity to mature its development practices and prove its long-term viability.
The incident underscores the importance of disciplined development processes in open-source projects, particularly those as critical as the Linux kernel. While RISC-V's future remains bright, its path to mainstream adoption will require the same attention to quality and process discipline that has made Linux the world's most successful open-source project.
The next kernel cycle will be telling—it will reveal whether the RISC-V community can learn from this harsh but necessary lesson and emerge as a more reliable partner in the Linux ecosystem.
