Linux Kernel 2.2.20-pre10 Initial Impressions

Linux Kernel 2.2.20-pre10 Initial Impressions

[John L. Males]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Hello,

I am not on the kernel mailing list.  I would appreciate being copied
in on any replies.

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.

I seem to also observe some iteresting memory management differences
with the 2.2.20-pre10 kernel vs the 2.2.19 kernel with the Open Wall
patch.  Agian not enough day to day use logged in to give a sense. 
Then if I do sense, the challence to how to quanitify this will
follow.

Just thought you like to know.  Oh, I keep forgetting to ask, is
there any issue related to the superblock work that has been going on
in tha last few version of the 2.4 kernel and a 2.2.19 or other 2.2.x
kernel?  Only asking as seemd to have some very interesting problems
show up back after switching back from  2.4.8 kernel to the 2.2.19
kernel.


Regards,

John L. Males
Willowdale, Ontario
Canada
18 September 2001 23:26
mailto:jlmales@softhome.net

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGPfreeware 6.5.8 for non-commercial use <http://www.pgp.com>

iQA/AwUBO6geeOAqzTDdanI2EQJZywCg0yllJ8HWqhQuXdDWq6aSVu5B4EgAn0la
G1uAjzOiUjSd4goAUXRk1oLI
=4K5d
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----



"Boooomer ... Boom Boom, how are you Boom Boom" Boomer 1985 - February/2000

Re: Linux Kernel 2.2.20-pre10 Initial Impressions

[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

Re[03]: Linux Kernel 2.2.20-pre10 Initial Impressions

[John L. Males]

-----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 <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>

> > 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 <http://www.pgp.com>

iQA/AwUBO6zUS+AqzTDdanI2EQKL9gCfaspQNb4/BgiiIrOt/39VzraHG3sAoI8K
y9yuS0+0ZLXMhC7M2Ui9zxHc
=QGC7
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----



"Boooomer ... Boom Boom, how are you Boom Boom" Boomer 1985 - February/2000

Re[03]: Linux Kernel 2.2.20-pre10 Initial Impressions

[John L. Males]

-----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 <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>

> > 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 13:20
mailto:jlmales@softhome.net

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGPfreeware 6.5.8 for non-commercial use 
<http://www.pgp.com>

iQA/AwUBO6zWZOAqzTDdanI2EQLOpgCfZblo3fb0aiCHWdPJFGAo7AtocHcAoNb0
bxJs+70lRt/chENPA3UAq2RO
=ZlsF
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----



"Boooomer ... Boom Boom, how are you Boom Boom" Boomer 1985 - February/2000

Re: Re[03]: Linux Kernel 2.2.20-pre10 Initial Impressions

[Alan Cox]

> Understood, but I actually took my 2.2.19 .config and ran "make
> oldconfig", then "make xconfig" making no changes, just saved it

Excellent. That makes the data so much more valuable

> 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.

I look forward to the results. Can you cc Andrea Arcangeli on them if they
look VM related as Andrea is the 2.2.19 VM person (and now the 2.4.10pre
one)

Re[05]: Linux Kernel 2.2.20-pre10 Initial Impressions

[John L. Males]

[-- Attachment #1: Mail message body --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 10920 bytes --]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Hi Alan,

I have completed some testing.  Some as I am not sure what other
testing I need to do as will become evident below.  I have not copied
in Andrea Arcangeli.  Based on the results it would be my (limited
Linux Kernel knowledge) opinion whatever I am observing is not likely
VM related.

The summary of the results are as follows:


Test Case One:
****************

Steps used:

- - Boot System
- - Log onto non-root user id.
- - "startx" (KDE desktop started)
(applications prestart from last log off include kppp, kpppload,
xosview, gnome terminal, khrono, 3 kfm's)
- - Start Netscape 4.78 from desktop ICON
- - Click the pull down arrow on far right side of the "Go To:" (AKA
URL line) of Netscape 4.78.

Results:

For Kernel 2.2.19OWL, 2.2.20-pre10, 2.4.9-ac10

All were instant response from Netscape.  Did the test for each
kernel twice; and yes that means each of the 6 tests were done from a
new boot of the PC.

This is the expected result, but until I did this test I was not
aware of any instant Netscape response to this action.  My "usual"
personal sequence of starting things was different, but traditional
as will be noted later.  I came up with this test based on some
non-browser experiences the latter part of this week.


Test Case Two:
*****************

Steps used:

- - Boot System
- - Log onto non-root user id.
- - "startx" (KDE desktop started)
(applications prestart from last log off include kppp, kpppload,
xosview, gnome terminal, khrono, 3 kfm's)
- - Had kppp "connect" to my ISP (dial up model 56KB, really 49,300
most of time, some connects 48,000, note kppp is configured to start
up ntpdate to sync with some time servers.)
- - Start Netscape 4.78 from desktop ICON
- - Click the pull down arrow on far right side of the "Go To:" (AKA
URL line) of Netscape 4.78.

Results:

For Kernel 2.2.19OWL, 2.2.20-pre10, 2.4.9-ac10

All times were 2 minutes 3 seconds to get the URL list that appears
when one clicks the noted button.  Did the test for each kernel
twice; and yes that means each of the 6 tests were done from a new
boot of the PC.

This is sort of the expected results, but until I did this test I was
not aware of how long the waint was in absolute terms.  My "usual"
personal sequence of starting things was different, but traditional
as will be noted later.  I came up with this test as I wanted to see
if the IPChains (2.2 kernels) or IPTables (2.4 kernel) was having an
effect on the delays I experienced.

Although I had never know how long it took for this URL list to
appear, my memory from my expereinces (have many as been happening
for long time)  was that with the 2.2.20-pre10 kernel things were
really much much longer.  Clearly from the tests I have done that is
not the case.  This test is not exactly how I usually start things
up.  Normally I have kppp start the IPChains script, then I start
Netscape.  This test clearly shows some relationship to my ppp0
connection being established and how long Netscape took to respond to
viewing a URL list.  Note we are not actually selecting a site to go
to, hence why test one was done and the very big surprize discovering
there was no delay in the action.  the test is just to click the list
button to see the list, no more than that.


Test Case Three:
*******************

Steps used:

- - After the second test with Kernel 2.4.9-ac10 of Test Case Two
- - kppp is still up and connected to ISP from Test Case Two
- - Closed Netscape completely.
- - Start Netscape 4.78 from desktop ICON
- - Click the pull down arrow on far right side of the "Go To:" (AKA
URL line) of Netscape 4.78.

Results:

For Kernel 2.4.9-ac10 as only Kernel did this test with:

For the two times this test case was also done, still a delay of 2
minutes 3 seconds from the time clicked the button until the URLs
appeared.

A special note for the second test done in this test case.  After the
first time did test for this test case, did an e2fsck and mount for a
mount point for HDA7.  The other mount points are all SCSI and
started at boot time.  The HDA device is not being auto mounted
mostly to allow me to work around the various problems with booting,
related lilo, but also exist with grub.  Again I decided on this
varient of the test as I do in fact start the system at times without
the HDA drive mounted or the IDE interface disabled when I need to do
lilo activities.


Test Case Four:
******************

Steps used:

- - After the second test with Kernel 2.4.9-ac10 of Test Case three
- - kppp is still up and connected to ISP from Test Case Two
- - Closed Netscape completely.
- - Started my IPTables based script that was also set to do a
"iptables -Lv" at end to see if that altered the time of the delay as
this would often match a suitation I have had in past few weeks on my
Linux system.
- - Start Netscape 4.78 from desktop ICON
- - Click the pull down arrow on far right side of the "Go To:" (AKA
URL line) of Netscape 4.78.

Results:

For Kernel 2.4.9-ac10 as only Kernel did this test with:

For the one time I did this test case, a delay of 2 minutes 19
seconds from the time clicked the button until the URLs appeared.


Test Case Five:
*****************

Steps used:

- - Boot System
- - Log onto non-root user id.
- - "startx" (KDE desktop started)
(applications prestart from last log off include kppp, kpppload,
xosview, gnome terminal, khrono, 3 kfm's)
- - Had kppp "connect" to my ISP (dial up model 56KB, really 49,300
most of time, some connects 48,000, note kppp is configured to start
up ntpdate to sync with some time servers.)
- - Started my IPChains based script that was also set to do a
"ipchains -L" at end to see if that altered the time of the delay as
this would often match a suitation I have had in past few weeks on my
Linux system.
- - Start Netscape 4.78 from desktop ICON
- - Click the pull down arrow on far right side of the "Go To:" (AKA
URL line) of Netscape 4.78.

Results:

For Kernel 2.2.19OWL only was this test done.  First time the delay
was 2 minutes 3 seconds, the second time it was 2 minutes 15 seconds.


Other Comments
*******************

All the kernels were complied using the same gcc compiler supplied
with SuSE 6.4.  The SuSE 6.4 I am using is up to date as of about
April/2001 as far as security fixes and like.  It is still using KDE
1.1.2, and XFree 3.3.6.  And yes the necessary elements to meet the
requirements of the 2.4 kernel are in place.  I managed to work the
SuSE 7.2 versions of those tools into the SuSE 6.4 system with some
nurturing :).  Other than that it is basically a SuSE 6.4 system
witth the odd application at a much higher level than supplied with
SuSE, but these are either console or X based apps.  Obviously no KDE
2 apps on this system.

Also of interesting note, during the time delay experienced there was
not much, if any CPU activity, so the delay does not seem to be
"processing" related.  For all intents and purposes I could not
observe any internet activity.  That is not to say there was none,
but not really observable.

In terms of the two 2.2 Kernels, the 2.2.20-pre-10 kernel was build
using the config of the 2.2.19 kernel via oldconfig.  The only
difference was when running oldconfig it asked about one item that
was not in the 2.2.19 kernel.  My reply was to make the module, even
though I had no use for the module.

The 2.2.19 Kernel is the base kernel from kernel.org plus the
Openwall patch:

http://www.openwall.com/linux/linux-2.2.19-ow1.tar.gz

Of course there was no Openwall patch made to the 2.2.20-pre10
kernel.

I have attached a screen image of the URL history list that was the
subject of this test to give a better understanding of what was being
selected to display.

This is not the only area where there are unexpected delays.  I am
just most familar with this one as it is the one I happen to do
almost every day.  Now although I am sure there were shorter and
different delays, I cannot duplicate it at moment the shorter ones
for the activity I do every day.  I will keep my wits about me to
better observe and see if I can identify what may be related to the
amount of time in a delay.

As for the impact of this observation for the 2.2.20-pre10 Kernel, I
am in no position to really say given my very lack of familarity with
the process, not to mention the kernel itself.  As a QA/Testing
person I can say that from what I have experienced in the past, and
see with the 2.2.20-pre10 kernel on the issue I am experiencing there
is likey no change.  At this point I would not be able to say if the
matter has some kernel element of impact or not.

It is possible I may have omitted some important point(s) in this
eMail note, or even omitted in my testing.  If so feel free to
comment.  I will be busy over the wekk and suggestion has it I will
need to work next weekend.  Be that the case, please be patient if I
am very slow in replying to any additional information or
clarification that may be required.


Regards,

John L. Males
Willowdale, Ontario
Canada
23 September 2001 20:00
mailto:jlmales@softhome.net


Subject:        	Re: Re[03]: Linux Kernel 2.2.20-pre10 Initial
Impressions
To:             	jlmales@softhome.net
Date sent:      	Sat, 22 Sep 2001 20:00:06 +0100 (BST)
Copies to:      	alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk (Alan Cox),
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
From:           	Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>

> > Understood, but I actually took my 2.2.19 .config and ran "make
> > oldconfig", then "make xconfig" making no changes, just saved it 
> 
> Excellent. That makes the data so much more valuable
> 
> > 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.
> 
> I look forward to the results. Can you cc Andrea Arcangeli on them
> if they look VM related as Andrea is the 2.2.19 VM person (and now
> the 2.4.10pre one)


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGPfreeware 6.5.8 for non-commercial use 
<http://www.pgp.com>

iQA/AwUBO66FquAqzTDdanI2EQLaBACg0SD0omLkTiCHBmfZMXXXCKsdjVcAoOi7
dYuaMbqUOnO1/1Fr108/ttbf
=dRDV
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----



"Boooomer ... Boom Boom, how are you Boom Boom" Boomer 1985 - February/2000

[-- Attachment #2: Attachment information. --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 470 bytes --]

The following section of this message contains a file attachment
prepared for transmission using the Internet MIME message format.
If you are using Pegasus Mail, or any another MIME-compliant system,
you should be able to save it or view it from within your mailer.
If you cannot, please ask your system administrator for assistance.

   ---- File information -----------
     File:  ns478.png
     Date:  23 Sep 2001, 13:40
     Size:  12884 bytes.
     Type:  Unknown

[-- Attachment #3: ns478.png --]
[-- Type: application/octet-stream, Size: 12884 bytes --]

Re: Linux Kernel 2.2.20-pre10 Initial Impressions

[Tim Moore]

"John L. Males" wrote:
> ...
> 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.
> ...

FWIW, I've been using ns 4.78 since August 20 on the listed kernels with
no noticable change.  All kernels have Andre's IDE patch.

If you have a specific test script I can give it a run.

2.2.19pre17, 2.2.20pre{6,9,10}
XFree86-3.3.6-29 (SVGA driver)
ide.2.2.19.05042001.patch
communicator-v478-us.x86-unknown-linux2.2.tgz

System is Athlon 850 (CONFIG_M686=y) on an Abit KA7.

00:00.0 Host bridge: VIA Technologies, Inc.: Unknown device 0391 (rev
02)
00:01.0 PCI bridge: VIA Technologies, Inc.: Unknown device 8391
00:07.0 ISA bridge: VIA Technologies, Inc. VT82C686 [Apollo Super] (rev
22)
00:07.1 IDE interface: VIA Technologies, Inc. VT82C586 IDE [Apollo] (rev
10)
00:07.4 Host bridge: VIA Technologies, Inc. VT82C686 [Apollo Super ACPI]
(rev 30)

rgds,
tim.
--

Re[06]: Linux Kernel 2.2.20-pre10 Initial Impressions

[John L. Males]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Hi Tim,

Thank you so much for your offer.

If you get a chance please refer to my posting yesterday where I
actually detailed the results of my testing and the steps I used.  If
you need further details feel free to ask.

My results seem to suggest one interesting behaviour.  At this point
I am not sure if it is part kernel, part Netscape or all Netscape.  I
would lean towards it not being all Kernel, but I could be really
wrong given my very limited knowledge of the kernel.  Just my
professional QA/Testing opinion with varied my technical background.


Regards,

John L. Males
Willowdale, Ontario
Canada
24 September 2001 20:25
mailto:jlmales@softhome.net


Date sent:      	Mon, 24 Sep 2001 14:02:32 -0700
From:           	Tim Moore <timothymoore@bigfoot.com>
Organization:   	Yoyodyne Propulsion Systems, Inc.
To:             	jlmales@softhome.net
Copies to:      	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject:        	Re: Linux Kernel 2.2.20-pre10 Initial Impressions

> "John L. Males" wrote:
> > ...
> > 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. ...
> 
> FWIW, I've been using ns 4.78 since August 20 on the listed kernels
> with no noticable change.  All kernels have Andre's IDE patch.
> 
> If you have a specific test script I can give it a run.
> 
> 2.2.19pre17, 2.2.20pre{6,9,10}
> XFree86-3.3.6-29 (SVGA driver)
> ide.2.2.19.05042001.patch
> communicator-v478-us.x86-unknown-linux2.2.tgz
> 
> System is Athlon 850 (CONFIG_M686=y) on an Abit KA7.
> 
> 00:00.0 Host bridge: VIA Technologies, Inc.: Unknown device 0391
> (rev 02) 00:01.0 PCI bridge: VIA Technologies, Inc.: Unknown device
> 8391 00:07.0 ISA bridge: VIA Technologies, Inc. VT82C686 [Apollo
> Super] (rev 22) 00:07.1 IDE interface: VIA Technologies, Inc.
> VT82C586 IDE [Apollo] (rev 10) 00:07.4 Host bridge: VIA
> Technologies, Inc. VT82C686 [Apollo Super ACPI] (rev 30)
> 
> rgds,
> tim.
> --


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGPfreeware 6.5.8 for non-commercial use 
<http://www.pgp.com>

iQA/AwUBO6/c/uAqzTDdanI2EQJjaACfXE49KYj/PSLGlXh18iYJTytyRmYAoK0C
hIiTpYo2vu1OHKYb5YPKv8qc
=Nz85
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----



"Boooomer ... Boom Boom, how are you Boom Boom" Boomer 1985 - February/2000

Re: Linux Kernel 2.2.20-pre10 Initial Impressions

[Mike Fedyk]

On Sun, Sep 23, 2001 at 08:00:53PM -0500, John L. Males wrote:
Content-Description: Mail message body
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> Hi Alan,
> 
> Test Case One:
> ****************
> 
> - - Start Netscape 4.78 from desktop ICON
> - - Click the pull down arrow on far right side of the "Go To:" (AKA
> URL line) of Netscape 4.78.
> 
> Results:
> All were instant response from Netscape.  Did the test for each

> Test Case Two:
> *****************
> 
> Steps used:
> 
> - - Boot System
> - - Log onto non-root user id.
> - - "startx" (KDE desktop started)
> (applications prestart from last log off include kppp, kpppload,
> xosview, gnome terminal, khrono, 3 kfm's)
> - - Had kppp "connect" to my ISP (dial up model 56KB, really 49,300
> most of time, some connects 48,000, note kppp is configured to start
> up ntpdate to sync with some time servers.)
> - - Start Netscape 4.78 from desktop ICON
> - - Click the pull down arrow on far right side of the "Go To:" (AKA
> URL line) of Netscape 4.78.
> 
> Results:
> 
> For Kernel 2.2.19OWL, 2.2.20-pre10, 2.4.9-ac10
> 
> All times were 2 minutes 3 seconds to get the URL list that appears
> 
> 

> Test Case Three:
> *******************
> 
> For the two times this test case was also done, still a delay of 2
> minutes 3 seconds from the time clicked the button until the URLs
> appeared.

> Test Case Four:
> ******************
> 
> For the one time I did this test case, a delay of 2 minutes 19
> seconds from the time clicked the button until the URLs appeared.
> 
> 

> Test Case Five:
> *****************
> For Kernel 2.2.19OWL only was this test done.  First time the delay
> was 2 minutes 3 seconds, the second time it was 2 minutes 15 seconds.
> 
> 

I think you're right, it's not a kernel issue.  You should run "tcpdump -qni
ppp0" in a xterm before you start netscape.

You will probably see dns requests going out.  You should check to make sure
that you are not blocking incomming udp ports (1024-5000 for bind, not sure
about resolver...) as that would lengthen the response time considerably if
only a few are open, and completely stop you if all are blocked.

Mike