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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).