From: Benjamin LaHaise <bcrl@kvack.org>
To: Grant Coady <gcoady@gmail.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: 2.6 vs 2.4, ssh terminal slowdown
Date: Tue, 7 Feb 2006 22:02:34 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20060208030234.GE14748@kvack.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <igmiu15lgo31rh92ugm7i0c35jcsrj0631@4ax.com>
On Wed, Feb 08, 2006 at 01:50:10PM +1100, Grant Coady wrote:
> Vague 'cos I do not know where the problem is. One might say slowdown
> is like a near a 1ms delay per line output, but slowdown does not
> correlate to kernel tick frequency. :(
Two things come to mind: can you try doing a vmstat 1 while running the
test and compare 2.4 vs 2.6? Also, does it make a difference if you switch
from the e100 driver to eepro100?
> I'll take a look at oprofile, report back if I can make sense of it ;)
If the CPU is pegged that will guide fixing things quite nicely, but the
fact that it's 1ms per line sounds like something more sinister.
-ben
--
"Ladies and gentlemen, I'm sorry to interrupt, but the police are here
and they've asked us to stop the party." Don't Email: <dont@kvack.org>.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-02-08 3:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 41+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-02-08 2:11 2.6 vs 2.4, ssh terminal slowdown Grant Coady
2006-02-08 2:24 ` Benjamin LaHaise
2006-02-08 2:50 ` Grant Coady
2006-02-08 3:02 ` Benjamin LaHaise [this message]
2006-02-08 2:35 ` Con Kolivas
2006-02-08 2:55 ` Grant Coady
2006-02-08 3:00 ` Con Kolivas
2006-02-08 4:12 ` Barry K. Nathan
2006-02-08 4:41 ` Grant Coady
2006-02-08 4:51 ` Grant Coady
2006-02-08 5:17 ` Willy Tarreau
2006-02-08 5:39 ` Grant Coady
2006-02-08 7:43 ` Lee Revell
2006-02-09 17:06 ` Jan Engelhardt
2006-02-09 20:06 ` Lee Revell
2006-02-10 6:35 ` MIke Galbraith
2006-02-12 13:47 ` MIke Galbraith
2006-02-12 19:03 ` Lee Revell
2006-02-12 21:36 ` MIke Galbraith
2006-02-12 23:23 ` Lee Revell
2006-02-12 23:39 ` Lee Revell
2006-02-13 3:09 ` MIke Galbraith
2006-02-13 3:39 ` Lee Revell
2006-02-13 4:59 ` MIke Galbraith
2006-02-13 5:05 ` Con Kolivas
2006-02-13 5:32 ` MIke Galbraith
2006-02-13 5:37 ` Con Kolivas
2006-02-13 5:57 ` MIke Galbraith
2006-02-13 6:08 ` Con Kolivas
2006-02-13 6:35 ` MIke Galbraith
2006-02-13 6:38 ` Lee Revell
2006-02-13 7:08 ` MIke Galbraith
2006-02-13 8:43 ` Lee Revell
2006-02-13 10:06 ` MIke Galbraith
2006-02-13 12:35 ` MIke Galbraith
2006-02-15 4:22 ` Lee Revell
2006-02-15 5:22 ` MIke Galbraith
2006-02-15 6:11 ` Lee Revell
2006-02-15 7:17 ` MIke Galbraith
2006-02-13 7:15 ` Con Kolivas
2006-02-13 7:41 ` MIke Galbraith
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=20060208030234.GE14748@kvack.org \
--to=bcrl@kvack.org \
--cc=gcoady@gmail.com \
--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