From: Lee Revell <rlrevell@joe-job.com>
To: wei.li4@elf.mcgill.ca
Cc: linuxppc-embedded@ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: Which is better for Wireless Network Support, 2.6 or 2.4?
Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2006 18:04:46 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1155247486.20210.28.camel@mindpipe> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20060810132251.ycxgkqik5csw0gc0@webmail.mcgill.ca>
On Thu, 2006-08-10 at 13:22 -0400, wei.li4@elf.mcgill.ca wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> I am working on wireless data application via MPC875 host USB, is there
> any difference to use Linux 2.6.x or Linux 2.4.x? Is it Linux 2.6 more
> like RTOS? Thanks.
>
Yes, absolutely. Recent Linux 2.6 kernels (since 2.6.14 or so) have
much better RT performance if PREEMPT is enabled than any 2.4 kernel.
Lee
prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-08-10 22:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-08-10 17:22 Which is better for Wireless Network Support, 2.6 or 2.4? wei.li4
2006-08-10 22:04 ` Lee Revell [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1155247486.20210.28.camel@mindpipe \
--to=rlrevell@joe-job.com \
--cc=linuxppc-embedded@ozlabs.org \
--cc=wei.li4@elf.mcgill.ca \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.