Messages in this thread | | | From | Daniel Phillips <> | Subject | Re: [2.4.17/18pre] VM and swap - it's really unusable | Date | Mon, 14 Jan 2002 07:49:57 +0100 |
| |
On January 13, 2002 08:35 pm, J Sloan wrote: > The problem here is that when people report > that the low latency patch works better for them > than the preempt patch, they aren't talking about > bebnchmarking the time to compile a kernel, they > are talking about interactive feel and smoothness.
Nobody is claiming the low latency patch works better than -preempt+lock_break, only that low latency can equal -preempt+lock_break, which is a claim I'm skeptical of, but oh well.
> I've no agenda other than wanting to see linux > as an attractive option for the multimedia and > gaming crowds - and in my experience, the low > latency patches simply give a much smoother > feel and a more pleasant experience. Kernel > compilation time is the farthest thing from my > mind when e.g. playing Q3A!
You need to read the thread *way* more closely ;-)
> I'd be happy to check out the preempt patch > again and see if anything's changed, if the > problem of tux+preempt oopsing has been > dealt with -
Right, useful.
-- Daniel - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |