From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from ug-out-1314.google.com (ug-out-1314.google.com [66.249.92.170]) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 45B3367A05 for ; Sat, 13 May 2006 02:24:34 +1000 (EST) Received: by ug-out-1314.google.com with SMTP id e2so375730ugf for ; Fri, 12 May 2006 09:24:33 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <82ecf08e0605120924p59ae4c21pb0fbf3e8b7170c07@mail.gmail.com> Date: Fri, 12 May 2006 13:24:33 -0300 From: "Thiago Galesi" To: "Felix Domke" Subject: 2.6 vs 2.4 In-Reply-To: <44649F09.2020803@elitedvb.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed References: <7cb1293c0605112351y658460a0x8b793ea12004dbfc@mail.gmail.com> <82ecf08e0605120729l43041aebuaef375a568700354@mail.gmail.com> <44649F09.2020803@elitedvb.net> Cc: linuxppc-dev List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , > Can you point me to a list of changes which where done? I really like to > check if they apply to my performance problems with 2.6 kernels, i.e. if > it's worth porting the board specific changes to a newer kernel. > I'm sorry, I was thinking (specifically) of the 8XX port that went from broken to maintained. It would help if you could mention some ofthe problems you are having. >When we switched from 2.4 to 2.6, IDE performance ("hdparm -t" to have a >single number) was reduced by about 25% (even after trying to finetune >the IDE driver >On a 300MHz embedded mips machine, saturating a 100MBit network link via >ftp is not easy. Unfortunatelly my knowlege of IDE is almost 0. Maybe it has something to do with schedulers being used? About network, I had better results with a much slower processor than your reported 5Mb/s (60MHz PPC in 2.6.10) Thiago