Messages in this thread | | | From | "Sean Elble" <> | Subject | Re: Unresponiveness of 2.4.16 | Date | Mon, 26 Nov 2001 23:00:14 -0500 |
| |
> Not exactly. That kernel is -ac based (plus lots of other patches, some > of them VM tweaks) and is a Van Riel VM.
Right; it's not the "stock" 2.4.9 VM, but it isn't Andrea's either . . . one of those gray area things. :-) I guess we just have to wait until he posts the results with the "stock" 2.4.9 kernel to see if Red Hat fixed the problem or not. Have a good one!
----------------------------------------------- Sean P. Elble Editor, Writer, Co-Webmaster ReactiveLinux.com (Formerly MaximumLinux.org) http://www.reactivelinux.com/ elbles@reactivelinux.com -----------------------------------------------
----- Original Message ----- From: "Doug Ledford" <dledford@redhat.com> To: "Sean Elble" <S_Elble@yahoo.com> Cc: "Nathan G. Grennan" <ngrennan@okcforum.org>; <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org> Sent: Monday, November 26, 2001 10:56 PM Subject: Re: Unresponiveness of 2.4.16
> Sean Elble wrote: > > >>I tried switching to Redhat's 2.4.9-13 kernel and it acts Alot better. > >>Not only does 2.4.9-13 not get the 30 second delay, but it also seems to > >>take advantage of caching. 2.4.16 takes the same moment of time each > >>time, even tho it should have cached it all into memory the first time. > >> > > > > Unless Red Hat has specifically added Andrea's new VM code to the 2.4.9 > > kernel, then that kernel is still using the old VM. > > > Not exactly. That kernel is -ac based (plus lots of other patches, some > of them VM tweaks) and is a Van Riel VM. > > > > > -- > > Doug Ledford <dledford@redhat.com> http://people.redhat.com/dledford > Please check my web site for aic7xxx updates/answers before > e-mailing me about problems
- 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/
| |