From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from pippin.tausq.org (gandalf.tausq.org [64.81.244.94]) by dsl2.external.hp.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 82FA24843 for ; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 10:05:35 -0700 (MST) Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2004 10:15:11 -0800 From: Randolph Chung To: Heikki Hannikainen Subject: Re: [parisc-linux] K380 partial success, the state of the port? Message-ID: <20040128181511.GD959@tausq.org> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: Cc: parisc-linux@lists.parisc-linux.org Reply-To: Randolph Chung List-Id: parisc-linux developers list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , > Is the parisc port supposed to be this slow at it's current state, or is > this a problem which is specific to my setup? fork/exec is very slow on parisc right now. in other areas though performance is not too shabby. Ryan posted lmbench results to the list recently. Check the archive for details. > - Should I go to the 2.6 tree? I compiled it from the CVS (to get the > tulip driver working) but the SCSI failed: Yes, you should go to 2.6, but as Joel pointed out SMP is not yet working correctly. We have a few scsi gurus on the parisc list so they can address the scsi issues :) randolph -- Randolph Chung Debian GNU/Linux Developer, hppa/ia64 ports http://www.tausq.org/