Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 14 Jul 1998 17:01:31 -0400 (EDT) | From | Alex Buell <> | Subject | Re: Strange interrupt behaviour |
| |
On Tue, 14 Jul 1998, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> That's all I'm saying. Essentially, I've tried to convince people with raw > numbers that the VM layer doesn't actually need any major overhaul, it > only needs to get the slight fixes. People that have talked about major > overhauls haven't shown me either code _or_ reasoning, so..
Ok, we get the point. I've just had a thought - what if the problems we've been seeing with the memory allocation/defragmentation issues are unique to low memory machines? If that is the case, then maybe we should have a _different_ algorithm for handling these low memory machines (use 2.0.x algorithms?), and keep the existing one for boxes with plenty of memory.
I'm now finding that after about 7 days' of uptime, this Linux box [P75 + 16MB] actually gets slower than Win95. I'm not kidding. It's getting to the point where I am contemplating dumping 2.1.x and going back to 2.0.35.
And that brings me to a nasty thought I've been having lately. What if we have been infiltrated by covert Microsoft agents intent on sabotaging the Linux project? I have seen the problems that you've had with the Linux kernel by integrating bad source code that was given to you. [2.1.44 comes to mind]
It pays to be paranoid. :o) That's why I'm still here and not in prison. Just kiddin, but you know what I'm thinking, right, dude?
Cheers, Alex.
--- /\_/\ Legalise cannabis now! ( o.o ) Smoke some cannabis today! > ^ < Peace, Love, Unity and Respect to all.
Check out http://www.tahallah.demon.co.ukA
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.altern.org/andrebalsa/doc/lkml-faq.html
| |