*massive* slowdowns on 2.4.1-pre1[1|2]

*massive* slowdowns on 2.4.1-pre1[1|2]

[David Riley]

Sorry if this is a redundant post, but I didn't see any related posts
(at least from the subject lines)...

Kernel 2.4.1-pre11 and pre12 are both massively slower than 2.4.0 on the
same machine, compiled with the same options.  The machine is a Athlon
900 on a KT133 chipset.  The slowdown is noticealbe in all areas...
booting takes over five minutes, keyboard input is noticeably delayed,
and the PC speaker makes much longer beeps when beeping the console.  I
just wanted to post this since 2.4.1 is soon for release (at least
according to Linus' post on -pre11) and we wouldn't want to release this
if it affects more than just me.  I've tried a number of different
options to make this work, but none have seemed to work.  BTW, my
problems are nothing similar to the current discussion of KT133
misbehaviour, especially since this machine works perfectly on 2.4.0.
-
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/

Re: *massive* slowdowns on 2.4.1-pre1[1|2]

[Mark Hahn]

> Kernel 2.4.1-pre11 and pre12 are both massively slower than 2.4.0 on the
> same machine, compiled with the same options.  The machine is a Athlon
> 900 on a KT133 chipset.  The slowdown is noticealbe in all areas...

this is known: Linus decreed that, since two people reported 
disk corruption on VIA, any machine with a VIA southbridge
must boot in stupid 1992 mode (PIO).  (yes, it might be possible
to boot with ide=autodma or something, but who would guess?)

Linus: I hope you don't consider this a releasable state!
VIA now owns 40% of the chipset market...

-
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/

RE: *massive* slowdowns on 2.4.1-pre1[1|2]

[Grover, Andrew]

If you have ACPI enabled, it is the culprit.

(I'm workin' on it! ;-)

Anyway, ACPI driver is marked "developmental and/or incomplete" and will not
be otherwise any time soon so it's broken-ness should IMO not hold up kernel
releases.

Regards -- Andy
(ACPI maintainer)


> -----Original Message-----
> From: David Riley [mailto:oscar@the-rileys.net]
> Sent: Monday, January 29, 2001 5:59 PM
> To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
> Subject: *massive* slowdowns on 2.4.1-pre1[1|2]
> 
> 
> Sorry if this is a redundant post, but I didn't see any related posts
> (at least from the subject lines)...
> 
> Kernel 2.4.1-pre11 and pre12 are both massively slower than 
> 2.4.0 on the
> same machine, compiled with the same options.  The machine is a Athlon
> 900 on a KT133 chipset.  The slowdown is noticealbe in all areas...
> booting takes over five minutes, keyboard input is noticeably delayed,
> and the PC speaker makes much longer beeps when beeping the 
> console.  I
> just wanted to post this since 2.4.1 is soon for release (at least
> according to Linus' post on -pre11) and we wouldn't want to 
> release this
> if it affects more than just me.  I've tried a number of different
> options to make this work, but none have seemed to work.  BTW, my
> problems are nothing similar to the current discussion of KT133
> misbehaviour, especially since this machine works perfectly on 2.4.0.
> -
> 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/
> 

-
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/

Re: *massive* slowdowns on 2.4.1-pre1[1|2]

[Linus Torvalds]

In article <Pine.LNX.4.10.10101292102030.28124-100000@coffee.psychology.mcmaster.ca>,
Mark Hahn  <hahn@coffee.psychology.mcmaster.ca> wrote:
>> Kernel 2.4.1-pre11 and pre12 are both massively slower than 2.4.0 on the
>> same machine, compiled with the same options.  The machine is a Athlon
>> 900 on a KT133 chipset.  The slowdown is noticealbe in all areas...
>
>this is known: Linus decreed that, since two people reported 
>disk corruption on VIA, any machine with a VIA southbridge
>must boot in stupid 1992 mode (PIO).  (yes, it might be possible
>to boot with ide=autodma or something, but who would guess?)
>
>Linus: I hope you don't consider this a releasable state!
>VIA now owns 40% of the chipset market...

So find somebody who can figure out why the corruption happens, and I'll
be really happy with a patch that fixes it. In the meantime,
"releaseable" very much means that we did _everything_ possible to make
sure that people don't screw their disks over.

You have to realize that stability takes precedence over EVERYTHING. 

		Linus
-
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/

Re: *massive* slowdowns on 2.4.1-pre1[1|2]

[Michael B. Trausch]

On 29 Jan 2001, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> 
> You have to realize that stability takes precedence over EVERYTHING. 
> 
> 		Linus
> 

At least with Linux, if something is *slow*, it generally works *perfect*
or damn near close to it.  I'll take that; over Microsoft's being slow AND
buggy AND just fucks me up.

I've lost soo much data on my disks - but ONLY on my MS partitions and
running an MS operating system.  Granted, I don't use Linux to access
ANYTHING that is FAT based (unless I use mtools).

I'm running with a VIA board, and I'll be happy to have something slow and
reliable, than really fast and really able to fuck my data up.  ;p

	- Mike

===========================================================================
Michael B. Trausch                                    fd0man@crosswinds.net
Avid Linux User since April, '96!                           AIM:  ML100Smkr

              Contactable via IRC (DALNet) or AIM as ML100Smkr
===========================================================================

-
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/

Re: *massive* slowdowns on 2.4.1-pre1[1|2]

[Chris Wedgwood]

On Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 11:17:58PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:

    You have to realize that stability takes precedence over
    EVERYTHING.

Are you sure his desciption describes only disk-slow down? Seems to
me something else is going on... why would speaker beeps take longer?
Maybe some kind of PM weirdo?


  --cw
-
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/

Re: *massive* slowdowns on 2.4.1-pre1[1|2]

[Tobias Ringstrom]

On Mon, 29 Jan 2001, Mark Hahn wrote:
> > Kernel 2.4.1-pre11 and pre12 are both massively slower than 2.4.0 on the
> > same machine, compiled with the same options.  The machine is a Athlon
> > 900 on a KT133 chipset.  The slowdown is noticealbe in all areas...
>
> this is known: Linus decreed that, since two people reported
> disk corruption on VIA, any machine with a VIA southbridge
> must boot in stupid 1992 mode (PIO).  (yes, it might be possible
> to boot with ide=autodma or something, but who would guess?)

The only patch concerning VIA IDE in 2.4.1 is a patch that honors the
user's choise in "make menuconfig" regarding using DMA by default.  Just
say yes to that option, and you should have DMA enabled at boot, as you
had in 2.4.0.

The old behaviour was a bug.

/Tobias

-
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/

Re: *massive* slowdowns on 2.4.1-pre1[1|2]

[David Riley]

Chris Wedgwood wrote:
> 
> On Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 11:17:58PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> 
>     You have to realize that stability takes precedence over
>     EVERYTHING.
> 
> Are you sure his desciption describes only disk-slow down? Seems to
> me something else is going on... why would speaker beeps take longer?
> Maybe some kind of PM weirdo?

My problem had nothing to do with disk access. Keyboard input isn't
slowed by disk access.  I knew that... In any case, sub-486 speeds
aren't attained through using PIO instead of UDMA... my 486 uses PIO
disks anyway, so it's moot.  The real culprit was ACPI, which is having
some temporary problems.  I turned it off and everything's great
(thanks, Andrew).
-
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/