LTS Kernel 5.10 and Mint 20(+) query

MurphCID · Post by **MurphCID** » Tue Mar 16, 2021 7:02 am

For argument's sake, can Mint 20(+) accept the 5.10 kernel, and would it advantageous for new hardware? Not looking for a "if its not broke don't fix it" type argument, but more of a is this possible, and the upsides of adding the 5.10 Kernel. 5.8 works ok on my newer hardware, but would 5.10 be a better choice for the latest hardware? Also how would you add 5.10 kernels and would they auto update?

Pjotr · Post by **Pjotr** » Tue Mar 16, 2021 7:05 am

Don't. Unless it has become officially available. Only official kernels have been modified and adapted for your Mint.

MurphCID · Post by **MurphCID** » Tue Mar 16, 2021 7:09 am

Pjotr wrote: ⤴Tue Mar 16, 2021 7:05 am Don't. Unless it has become officially available. Only official kernels have been modified and adapted for your Mint.

Understood, but if I was going to lose my mind and do it, would there be any advantages?

Pjotr · Post by **Pjotr** » Tue Mar 16, 2021 7:20 am

MurphCID wrote: ⤴Tue Mar 16, 2021 7:09 am
Pjotr wrote: ⤴Tue Mar 16, 2021 7:05 am Don't. Unless it has become officially available. Only official kernels have been modified and adapted for your Mint.
Understood, but if I was going to lose my mind and do it, would there be any advantages?

Of course, but they almost certainly wouldn't outweigh the disadvantages.

Moonstone Man · Post by **Moonstone Man** » Tue Mar 16, 2021 7:21 am

MurphCID wrote: ⤴Tue Mar 16, 2021 7:09 am
Pjotr wrote: ⤴Tue Mar 16, 2021 7:05 am Don't. Unless it has become officially available. Only official kernels have been modified and adapted for your Mint.
Understood, but if I was going to lose my mind and do it, would there be any advantages?

I run it. There is an official OEM version in the repositories.

Code: Select all

boot@akhenaten:~$ apt policy linux-oem-20.04-edge
linux-oem-20.04-edge:
  Installed: 5.10.0.1016.17
  Candidate: 5.10.0.1016.17
  Version table:
 *** 5.10.0.1016.17 500
        500 http://security.ubuntu.com/ubuntu focal-security/main amd64 Packages
        500 http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu focal-updates/main amd64 Packages
        100 /var/lib/dpkg/status

Better support for some hardware sensors and newer CPUs.

Moonstone Man · Post by **Moonstone Man** » Tue Mar 16, 2021 7:22 am

Pjotr wrote: ⤴Tue Mar 16, 2021 7:20 am Of course, but they almost certainly wouldn't outweigh the disadvantages.

How so? Like what? It's been running fine here for months, and if there were disadvantages, why would Ubuntu publish it?

t42 · Post by **t42** » Tue Mar 16, 2021 7:26 am

It seems that longterm kernel.org and Ubuntu LTS kernels are never the same version.
Ubuntu kernel lifecycle

Pjotr · Post by **Pjotr** » Tue Mar 16, 2021 7:27 am

Kadaitcha Man wrote: ⤴Tue Mar 16, 2021 7:21 am There is an official OEM version in the repositories.

Only in the unstable branch of the Canonical Kernel Team PPA, and even they seem to have shifted to the 5.11:
https://launchpad.net/~canonical-kernel ... u/unstable

Not for the faint of heart. And most certainly not intended for mainstream users.

Pjotr · Post by **Pjotr** » Tue Mar 16, 2021 7:28 am

t42 wrote: ⤴Tue Mar 16, 2021 7:26 am It seems that longterm kernel.org and Ubuntu LTS kernels are never the same version.
Ubuntu kernel lifecycle

Each follows his own path. Ubuntu LTS kernel does not equal upstream LTS kernel.

oldgranola · Post by **oldgranola** » Tue Mar 16, 2021 4:07 pm

I've done some kernel hopping, primarily with keeping up with latest LTS generic, but also low latency and speciality kernels. It was educational and did help when Mint for a short time went to a kernel series that wasn't compatible with some hardware and gpu drivers I had. As long as you keep a stable version that you can go back to, there is no real harm or risk. Just realize that you may run into issues so keep an eye out and don't expect support from our LM experts to fix while doing so. When/if you run into something, first go back to the LM kernel, update that. But I'm perfectly fine with the 5.8.0 LM series for LM20.1. On my Arch (mostly manjaro) and MX computers, I do keep up with the newest LTS which is 5.10-.23 at this time without probs as far as I can tell.

dorsetUK · Post by **dorsetUK** » Tue Mar 16, 2021 4:31 pm

Pjotr wrote: ⤴Tue Mar 16, 2021 7:27 am
Kadaitcha Man wrote: ⤴Tue Mar 16, 2021 7:21 am There is an official OEM version in the repositories.
Only in the unstable branch of the Canonical Kernel Team PPA, and even they seem to have shifted to the 5.11:
https://launchpad.net/~canonical-kernel ... u/unstable

Not for the faint of heart. And most certainly not intended for mainstream users.

Thanks Pjotr, it's nice to have confirmation of what I've always felt.

Said a mainstream user, who, these days is faint of heart.

Moonstone Man · Post by **Moonstone Man** » Tue Mar 16, 2021 4:44 pm

Pjotr wrote: ⤴Tue Mar 16, 2021 7:27 am Only in the unstable branch of the Canonical Kernel Team PPA...

You've actually said that part before but I let it ride for the sake of peace and tranquility, even though it's wrong.

Pjotr wrote:Not for the faint of heart. And most certainly not intended for mainstream users.

Code: Select all

boot@nebtepnefer:~$ uname -a; inxi -r; apt policy linux-oem-20.04-edge
Linux nebtepnefer 5.10.0-1016-oem #17-Ubuntu SMP Mon Mar 1 18:06:30 UTC 2021 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux
Repos:
  No active apt repos in: /etc/apt/sources.list 
  Active apt repos in: /etc/apt/sources.list.d/official-package-repositories.list 
  1: deb http://packages.linuxmint.com ulyssa main upstream import backport #id:linuxmint_main
  2: deb http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu focal main restricted universe multiverse
  3: deb http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu focal-updates main restricted universe multiverse
  4: deb http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu focal-backports main restricted universe multiverse
  5: deb http://security.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/ focal-security main restricted universe multiverse
  6: deb http://archive.canonical.com/ubuntu/ focal partner
linux-oem-20.04-edge:
  Installed: 5.10.0.1016.17
  Candidate: 5.10.0.1016.17
  Version table:
 *** 5.10.0.1016.17 500
        500 http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu focal-updates/main amd64 Packages
        500 http://security.ubuntu.com/ubuntu focal-security/main amd64 Packages
        100 /var/lib/dpkg/status

Please explain, because if that last sentence is true then, at best, AMD-4000-series, AMD 5000-series and Intel 10-series users, especially those with Intel or AMD iGPU, those who have issues with PCI AER, or have HP Z DreamColor monitors for example, who are looking for better support beyond kernel 5.8, are not mainstream users. At worst, the claim means there is absolutely nothing in the standard repos intended for mainstream users.

As you can see in the thread, people believe us when we express misguided opinion rather than technical fact.

Pjotr · Post by **Pjotr** » Tue Mar 16, 2021 4:59 pm

Kadaitcha Man wrote: ⤴Tue Mar 16, 2021 4:44 pm
Pjotr wrote: ⤴Tue Mar 16, 2021 7:27 am Only in the unstable branch of the Canonical Kernel Team PPA...
You've actually said that part before but I let it ride for the sake of peace and tranquility, even though it's wrong.

Please never feel any restraint in correcting me, if you think that the facts differ from what I've stated. I don't take that personally, and I certainly make mistakes from time to time. More often than I like.

This is one of them: I've missed the arrival of the oem version of the 5.10 kernel in the official repo's.

Yet I hesitate in recommending it for mainstream use. Doubtlessly there's a reason why the 5.10.x (still?) is only obtainable in other ways than the usual.

Moonstone Man · Post by **Moonstone Man** » Tue Mar 16, 2021 5:35 pm

Pjotr wrote: ⤴Tue Mar 16, 2021 4:59 pm I don't take that personally, and I certainly make mistakes from time to time. More often than I like.

We all make mistakes, and far more than any of us like, especially me. Not taking corrections personally is an admirable trait deserving of respect.

<tips sombrero>

Yet I hesitate in recommending it for mainstream use.

That sentiment is much more appreciable, quite understandable, and I think, the best approach. I wouldn't recommend it either, unless there was an overwhelming technical need, which so far I've not seen on the forums, and I think I'm unlikely to see. Recommending an oem kernel to people has support consequences for the forum. It isn't a mainstream kernel even though it is available to the mainstream, and recommending it outside of an overwhelming technical need that may never be seen would create confusion for those helpers here who aren't aware of it, and the likelihood of someone reproducing an issue coming down to a kernel version drops dramatically once you step outside the normal boundaries. It would be too disruptive to even start recommending it outside of exceptional circumstances. I think it's sufficient that some of us know it's there if it's ever needed.

Doubtlessly there's a reason why the 5.10.x (still?) is only obtainable in other ways than the usual.

I think it's because the oem kernel is more intended for system builders who need to keep up with current hardware, rather than users who like to keep up. Having later kernels as oem serves Ubuntu's plans to have their OS on OEM builds, and separates the oem kernel from the mainstream. Though that's just my opinion.

dorsetUK · Post by **dorsetUK** » Tue Mar 16, 2021 6:22 pm

Pjotr Yet I hesitate in recommending it for mainstream use. Doubtlessly there's a reason why the 5.10.x (still?) is only obtainable in other ways than the usual.

Thanks Pjotr, said a mainstream user.

JesseRBassett · Post by **JesseRBassett** » Sat Apr 17, 2021 6:56 pm

I use Kernel 5.10 on Mint 20.10. It works just fine and I personally have not noticed issues regarding performance. In fact it makes my Mint faster I think.

Moonstone Man · Post by **Moonstone Man** » Sat Apr 17, 2021 8:04 pm

JesseRBassett wrote: ⤴Sat Apr 17, 2021 6:56 pm I use Kernel 5.10 on Mint 20.10. It works just fine and I personally have not noticed issues regarding performance. In fact it makes my Mint faster I think.

For a speed difference to be noticeable to the human eye, the difference needs to be in the order of 25% or more.

https://link.springer.com/article/10.3758/BF03194764
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articl ... 413.ref046
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/a ... 8912002830

I have seen no such difference in speed between kernel 5.4, 5.8 and 5.10-oem. What I have seen is better support for my system's hardware, resulting in fewer dmesg errors and more accurate sensor reporting. If kernel 5.10 did offer a 25%+ perceptible increase then it would be splattered all over the news and people would be flocking to it in droves. I also see no such thing occurring.

As for what I think, I think opinion has no place in technical support unless a question necessarily implies that only an opinion is possible.

motoryzen · Post by **motoryzen** » Sat Apr 17, 2021 8:38 pm

backing up JesseRbassett's point, I've been using Kernels 5.10.11, 5.11.whatever, 5.11.12, 5.11.13, and now 5.11.14. I've used all of these on Linux Mint 20 cinnamon and currently on 20.1 cinnamon and have had zero problems

my inxi -Fxxxrz results

Code: Select all

System:    Kernel: 5.11.14-051114-generic x86_64 bits: 64 compiler: N/A Desktop: Cinnamon 4.8.6 wm: muffin 4.8.1 
           dm: LightDM 1.30.0 Distro: Linux Mint 20.1 Ulyssa base: Ubuntu 20.04 focal 
Machine:   Type: Desktop Mobo: ASRock model: X570 Taichi serial: <filter> BIOS: American Megatrends v: P4.10 
           date: 03/08/2021 
CPU:       Topology: 12-Core model: AMD Ryzen 9 5900X bits: 64 type: MT MCP arch: Zen 3 L2 cache: 6144 KiB 
           flags: avx avx2 lm nx pae sse sse2 sse3 sse4_1 sse4_2 sse4a ssse3 svm bogomips: 177604 
           Speed: 2199 MHz min/max: 2200/3700 MHz boost: enabled Core speeds (MHz): 1: 2199 2: 2198 3: 2196 4: 2199 
           5: 2198 6: 2196 7: 2196 8: 2199 9: 2198 10: 2195 11: 2199 12: 2198 13: 2197 14: 2199 15: 2200 16: 2199 17: 2198 
           18: 2198 19: 2195 20: 2194 21: 2193 22: 2193 23: 2197 24: 2198 
Graphics:  Device-1: Advanced Micro Devices [AMD/ATI] Ellesmere [Radeon RX 470/480/570/570X/580/580X/590] 
           vendor: Sapphire Limited Nitro+ driver: amdgpu v: kernel bus ID: 0b:00.0 chip ID: 1002:67df 
           Display: x11 server: X.Org 1.20.9 driver: amdgpu,ati unloaded: fbdev,modesetting,vesa tty: N/A 
           OpenGL: renderer: Radeon RX 580 Series (POLARIS10 DRM 3.40.0 5.11.14-051114-generic LLVM 11.0.1) 
           v: 4.6 Mesa 21.0.2 - kisak-mesa PPA direct render: Yes 
Audio:     Device-1: AMD Ellesmere HDMI Audio [Radeon RX 470/480 / 570/580/590] vendor: Sapphire Limited 
           driver: snd_hda_intel v: kernel bus ID: 0b:00.1 chip ID: 1002:aaf0 
           Device-2: Advanced Micro Devices [AMD] Starship/Matisse HD Audio vendor: ASRock driver: snd_hda_intel v: kernel 
           bus ID: 0e:00.4 chip ID: 1022:1487 
           Sound Server: ALSA v: k5.11.14-051114-generic 
Network:   Device-1: Intel I211 Gigabit Network vendor: ASRock driver: igb v: kernel port: f000 bus ID: 06:00.0 
           chip ID: 8086:1539 
           IF: enp6s0 state: up speed: 1000 Mbps duplex: full mac: <filter> 
Drives:    Local Storage: total: 15.28 TiB used: 5.03 TiB (32.9%) 
           ID-1: /dev/nvme0n1 vendor: Intel model: SSDPEDMW800G4 size: 745.21 GiB speed: 31.6 Gb/s lanes: 4 
           serial: <filter> rev: 8EV10174 scheme: MBR 
           ID-2: /dev/sda vendor: Toshiba model: HDWR11A size: 9.10 TiB speed: 6.0 Gb/s rotation: 7200 rpm 
           serial: <filter> rev: 0603 
           ID-3: /dev/sdb vendor: Samsung model: SSD 860 EVO 4TB size: 3.64 TiB speed: 6.0 Gb/s serial: <filter> rev: 4B6Q 
           scheme: GPT 
           ID-4: /dev/sdc vendor: Samsung model: SSD 860 EVO 1TB size: 931.51 GiB speed: 6.0 Gb/s serial: <filter> 
           rev: 3B6Q scheme: MBR 
           ID-5: /dev/sdd type: USB vendor: Smart Modular Tech. model: SHGS31-1000GS-2 size: 931.51 GiB serial: <filter> 
           scheme: MBR 
Partition: ID-1: / size: 732.02 GiB used: 53.06 GiB (7.2%) fs: ext4 dev: /dev/nvme0n1p5 
Sensors:   System Temperatures: cpu: 35.0 C mobo: N/A gpu: amdgpu temp: 45 C 
           Fan Speeds (RPM): N/A gpu: amdgpu fan: 842 
Repos:     No active apt repos in: /etc/apt/sources.list 
           Active apt repos in: /etc/apt/sources.list.d/additional-repositories.list 
           1: deb https://dl.winehq.org/wine-builds/ubuntu/ focal main
           Active apt repos in: /etc/apt/sources.list.d/cappelikan-ppa-focal.list 
           1: deb http://ppa.launchpad.net/cappelikan/ppa/ubuntu focal main
           2: deb-src http://ppa.launchpad.net/cappelikan/ppa/ubuntu focal main
           Active apt repos in: /etc/apt/sources.list.d/google-chrome.list 
           1: deb [arch=amd64] http://dl.google.com/linux/chrome/deb/ stable main
           Active apt repos in: /etc/apt/sources.list.d/kisak-kisak-mesa-focal.list 
           1: deb http://ppa.launchpad.net/kisak/kisak-mesa/ubuntu focal main
           No active apt repos in: /etc/apt/sources.list.d/lunarg-vulkan-1.2.162-focal.list 
           Active apt repos in: /etc/apt/sources.list.d/lutris-team-lutris-focal.list 
           1: deb http://ppa.launchpad.net/lutris-team/lutris/ubuntu focal main
           Active apt repos in: /etc/apt/sources.list.d/official-package-repositories.list 
           1: deb http://mirrors.evowise.com/linuxmint/packages ulyssa main upstream import backport
           2: deb http://la-mirrors.evowise.com/ubuntu focal main restricted universe multiverse
           3: deb http://la-mirrors.evowise.com/ubuntu focal-updates main restricted universe multiverse
           4: deb http://la-mirrors.evowise.com/ubuntu focal-backports main restricted universe multiverse
           5: deb http://security.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/ focal-security main restricted universe multiverse
           6: deb http://archive.canonical.com/ubuntu/ focal partner
           Active apt repos in: /etc/apt/sources.list.d/openshot_developers-ppa-focal.list 
           1: deb http://ppa.launchpad.net/openshot.developers/ppa/ubuntu focal main
Info:      Processes: 430 Uptime: 10h 42m Memory: 31.28 GiB used: 3.50 GiB (11.2%) Init: systemd v: 245 runlevel: 5 
           Compilers: gcc: 9.3.0 alt: 9 Shell: bash v: 5.0.17 running in: gnome-terminal inxi: 3.0.38

Answer to your original question about how to install Kernel versions not yet available via Mint's Update Manager ...one method is using Ubuntu Mainline Kernel Installer ( which is what I've been using and never had a problem)

************* DO a timeshift backup 1st..before updating to any major kernel release update ( such as from 5.4.whatever-whatever to 5.8.whatever-whatever..as well as 5.10 etc et c ) ***************************

Worst case = you find out any of the 5.10 or 5.11 kernels via Ubuntu Mainline Kernel Installer are causing a problem, do a timeshift restoration to before you did the kernel update and you're back to normal. This has never failed me since Linux Mint versions 18 and newer.

t42 · Post by **t42** » Sun Apr 18, 2021 8:15 am

I have a computer which is fine with any mainline kernel for years ... just a lucky combination of hardware.
Here is a quick testing on LM19.1

Code: Select all

CPU:
  Topology: Quad Core model: Intel Core i7-3632QM bits: 64 type: MT MCP 
  L2 cache: 6144 KiB

5.11.14-051114-generic #202104140732 SMP Wed Apr 14 07:55:50 UTC 2021
GtkPerf 0.40 - Starting testing: Sun Apr 18 13:58:30 2021
Total time:  5,11

5.4.0-72-generic #80~18.04.1-Ubuntu SMP Mon Apr 12 23:26:25 UTC 2021
GtkPerf 0.40 - Starting testing: Sun Apr 18 13:55:48 2021
Total time:  5,04

4.15.0-142-generic #146-Ubuntu SMP Tue Apr 13 01:11:19 UTC 2021
GtkPerf 0.40 - Starting testing: Sun Apr 18 13:50:17 2021
Total time:  4,77

Probably a better motivation to upgrade kernels may be a functionality, not speed.

Hoser Rob · Post by **Hoser Rob** » Sun Apr 18, 2021 9:56 am

t42 wrote: ⤴Tue Mar 16, 2021 7:26 am It seems that longterm kernel.org and Ubuntu LTS kernels are never the same version.
Ubuntu kernel lifecycle

AFAIK that's because when they started putting non LTS kernels in an LTS release (14.04 I think) they had to start doing all their own backports.

Linux Mint Forums

LTS Kernel 5.10 and Mint 20(+) query

LTS Kernel 5.10 and Mint 20(+) query

Re: LTS Kernel 5.10 and Mint 20(+) query

Re: LTS Kernel 5.10 and Mint 20(+) query

Re: LTS Kernel 5.10 and Mint 20(+) query

Re: LTS Kernel 5.10 and Mint 20(+) query

Re: LTS Kernel 5.10 and Mint 20(+) query

Re: LTS Kernel 5.10 and Mint 20(+) query

Re: LTS Kernel 5.10 and Mint 20(+) query

Re: LTS Kernel 5.10 and Mint 20(+) query

Re: LTS Kernel 5.10 and Mint 20(+) query

Re: LTS Kernel 5.10 and Mint 20(+) query

Re: LTS Kernel 5.10 and Mint 20(+) query

Re: LTS Kernel 5.10 and Mint 20(+) query

Re: LTS Kernel 5.10 and Mint 20(+) query

Re: LTS Kernel 5.10 and Mint 20(+) query

Re: LTS Kernel 5.10 and Mint 20(+) query

Re: LTS Kernel 5.10 and Mint 20(+) query

Re: LTS Kernel 5.10 and Mint 20(+) query

Re: LTS Kernel 5.10 and Mint 20(+) query

Re: LTS Kernel 5.10 and Mint 20(+) query