From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Tue, 19 Nov 2002 20:34:29 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Tue, 19 Nov 2002 20:34:29 -0500 Received: from out001pub.verizon.net ([206.46.170.140]:6355 "EHLO out001.verizon.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Tue, 19 Nov 2002 20:34:27 -0500 Message-ID: <3DDAE846.6080503@lemur.sytes.net> Date: Tue, 19 Nov 2002 20:41:26 -0500 From: Mathias Kretschmer User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.1) Gecko/20020826 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, zh-tw MIME-Version: 1.0 To: linux-kernel Subject: RE: PATCH: Recognize Tualatin cache size in 2.4.x Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at out001.verizon.net from [151.198.132.245] at Tue, 19 Nov 2002 19:41:27 -0600 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > > I tested it in a Compaq Proliant 330ML-G2 (P3 1.4) and a kernel > compilation is 100% faster if the patch is applied. > . The SMP weighting used by various parts of the > kernel will be slightly off, but I'd be amazed if it made *that much* > difference. I just patched my 2.4.20rc2 kernel. Now, it reports 512K cache for my 2 Tualatin 1.26 GHz CPUs. 'time make -j4 bzImage' went down from 3:30 to 3:04. Not too bad. Cheers, Mathias