From: Shawn Starr <Shawn.Starr@Home.net>
To: Andrew Morton <andrewm@uow.edu.au>
Cc: Shawn Starr <Shawn.Starr@Home.com>, Chris Mason <mason@suse.com>,
Gregory Maxwell <greg@linuxpower.cx>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Kernel 2.4.x and 2.4.1-preX - Higher latency then 2.2.xkernels?
Date: Sat, 27 Jan 2001 22:59:59 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3A73993F.DA35B57E@Home.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <186870000.980100593@tiny> <3A6B6FDE.93AF69CC@Home.net> <3A72820A.1488BDC@uow.edu.au> <3A7280F5.F122FE35@Home.com> <3A738A36.F6294623@Home.net> <3A739205.7C71EF89@uow.edu.au>
It should also be noted, that while using GCC and other tasks, the latency has returned to 2.2
levels from my point. Before. If you want to me to do any testing I can do that.
I applied the timepegs patch:
Kernel timepegs enabled. See http://www.uow.edu.au/~andrewm/linux/
Shawn.
> >
> > Andrew, the patch HAS made a difference. For example, while untaring glibc-2.2.1.tar.gz the
> > system was not sluggish (mouse movements in X) etc.
> >
> > Seems to be a go for latency improvements on this system.
>
> hmm.. OK, thanks.
>
> Chris, this seems to be a worthwhile improvement to mainstream
> reiserfs, independent of the low-latency thing. You can
> probably achieve 10 milliseconds with just a few lines of
> code - a subset of the patch which Shawn tested. (Unless you
> were planning on magical algorithmic improvements...).
>
> I'm all set up to generate those few lines of code, so
> I'll propose a patch later this week.
>
> -
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2001-01-28 4:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2001-01-20 19:50 Kernel 2.4.x and 2.4.1-preX - Higher latency then 2.2.x kernels? Shawn Starr
2001-01-20 19:59 ` Gregory Maxwell
2001-01-20 20:16 ` Shawn Starr
2001-01-21 18:09 ` Chris Mason
2001-01-21 23:25 ` Kernel 2.4.x and 2.4.1-preX - Higher latency then 2.2.xkernels? Shawn Starr
2001-01-27 8:08 ` Andrew Morton
2001-01-27 8:04 ` Shawn Starr
2001-01-28 2:55 ` Shawn Starr
2001-01-28 3:29 ` Andrew Morton
2001-01-28 3:59 ` Shawn Starr [this message]
2001-01-28 19:17 ` Chris Mason
2001-01-29 0:33 ` Shawn Starr
2001-01-28 11:46 ` Andrew Morton
2001-01-28 21:53 ` Shawn Starr
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=3A73993F.DA35B57E@Home.net \
--to=shawn.starr@home.net \
--cc=Shawn.Starr@Home.com \
--cc=andrewm@uow.edu.au \
--cc=greg@linuxpower.cx \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mason@suse.com \
/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