From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Sat, 22 Sep 2001 13:12:11 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sat, 22 Sep 2001 13:12:02 -0400 Received: from jive.SoftHome.net ([66.54.152.27]:35782 "EHLO softhome.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Sat, 22 Sep 2001 13:11:42 -0400 From: "John L. Males" Organization: Toronto, Ontario, Canada To: jlmales@softhome.net, Alan Cox Date: Sat, 22 Sep 2001 13:11:56 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re[03]: Linux Kernel 2.2.20-pre10 Initial Impressions Reply-to: jlmales@softhome.net CC: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Message-ID: <3BAC8E1C.2201.524EE2@localhost> In-Reply-To: <3BA7D82D.21744.63CF95@localhost> from "John L. Males" at Sep 18, 2001 11:26:37 PM In-Reply-To: X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12c) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Hi Alan, Subject: Re: Linux Kernel 2.2.20-pre10 Initial Impressions To: jlmales@softhome.net Date sent: Sat, 22 Sep 2001 17:35:44 +0100 (BST) Copies to: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org From: Alan Cox > > Ok, I finially had a chance to compile the 2.2.20-pre10 Kernel > > and run it though some basic paces. I need to do more specific A > > vs b (against the 2.2.19 Kernel), but it seems there are some > > performance issues. It is seems especially obvious with Netscape > > 4.78. I also had a odd Xfree error, that may have had some > > relationship to the performance issue. I have to say at this > > point the issue seems selective and not a general one, but I need > > to do a bit more > > checking. I cannot forsee this checking happening until this > > weekend. > > There are to all intents no VM changes of any kind between 2.2.19 > and 2.2.20pre10, so it would be interesting to compare configure > options and see what else might be different Understood, but I actually took my 2.2.19 .config and ran "make oldconfig", then "make xconfig" making no changes, just saved it based on prior experience, then the usual "make dep bzImage modules modules_install install" etc, you know that drill all too well. I seem to recall there was one new item while oldconfig was running. Cannot rememeber what it was. I do remember replying to make it a module. I am likely to do the benchmark tonight to get hard numbers on the difference I sense. I am a QA/Testing Specialist, so I am all to aware of the importance of keeping the variables all the same. My initial background was with assembler back in the real core memory/keypunch days where I disassembled and heavily modified the OS, compiler, assembler, system utilities and wrote a new way to load the OS, compilers, etc from scratch to a new disk. Ony advising you so you have a sense of my mindset and level of understanding. Not current with intimate x86 details or assembler, but will someday now that "falt" memory is back! :)) I will let you know what I find. If in meantime you feel there are other things needed or for me to check please let me know and I will be most happy to assist. Regards, John L. Males Willowdale, Ontario Canada 22 September 2001 13:11 mailto:jlmales@softhome.net -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGPfreeware 6.5.8 for non-commercial use iQA/AwUBO6zUS+AqzTDdanI2EQKL9gCfaspQNb4/BgiiIrOt/39VzraHG3sAoI8K y9yuS0+0ZLXMhC7M2Ui9zxHc =QGC7 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- "Boooomer ... Boom Boom, how are you Boom Boom" Boomer 1985 - February/2000