From: Patrick McFarland <unknown@panax.com>
To: Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Which is better at vm, and why? 2.2 or 2.4
Date: Sat, 13 Oct 2001 13:33:01 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20011013133301.G249@localhost> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20011013132327.F249@localhost> <E15sSey-0003Jf-00@the-village.bc.nu>
In-Reply-To: <E15sSey-0003Jf-00@the-village.bc.nu>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 719 bytes --]
Hmm, it seems that I didnt realize I had to cc that to the list, because I belive this is something that should be on the list.
Anyhow, exactly how much tweeking did you do, and isnt the ac tree suppost to be unstable?
On 13-Oct-2001, Alan Cox wrote:
> > Now as of the tuning problem, that seems to be deep magic to me. How would =
> > one tune 2.4 for a p133 with 16 megs of memory? Or should I just give up an=
> > d try to tune 2.2?
>
> I've been running 2.4.12-ac1 happily on both 20Mb and 32Mb boxes. The
> performance of the kernel has been good. Indeed the tuning work I had to do
> on the 20Mb PC110 has been userspace.
>
> Alan
>
--
Patrick "Diablo-D3" McFarland || unknown@panax.com
[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]
next parent reply other threads:[~2001-10-13 17:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <20011013132327.F249@localhost>
[not found] ` <E15sSey-0003Jf-00@the-village.bc.nu>
2001-10-13 17:33 ` Patrick McFarland [this message]
[not found] ` <E15sSti-0003ME-00@the-village.bc.nu>
2001-10-13 17:49 ` Which is better at vm, and why? 2.2 or 2.4 Patrick McFarland
2001-10-13 17:02 Patrick McFarland
2001-10-13 17:16 ` Alan Cox
2001-10-13 18:06 ` M. Edward Borasky
2001-10-13 18:17 ` Patrick McFarland
2001-10-13 18:29 ` Rik van Riel
2001-10-13 18:42 ` Patrick McFarland
2001-10-13 18:53 ` Patrick McFarland
2001-10-13 18:58 ` Rik van Riel
2001-10-13 19:04 ` Patrick McFarland
2001-10-13 19:10 ` Rik van Riel
2001-10-13 19:28 ` Wilson
2001-10-13 20:12 ` [solid]
2001-10-13 20:21 ` Patrick McFarland
2001-10-13 19:17 ` Rik van Riel
2001-10-13 18:37 ` M. Edward Borasky
2001-10-20 0:38 ` Daniel Phillips
2001-10-20 1:05 ` Robert Love
2001-10-20 19:56 ` Mike Fedyk
2001-10-20 20:03 ` Robert Love
2001-10-13 17:48 ` Mark Hahn
2001-10-13 21:29 ` Mike Fedyk
2001-10-13 21:47 ` Mark Hahn
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=20011013133301.G249@localhost \
--to=unknown@panax.com \
--cc=alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/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