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, 29 Sep 2001 14:31:19 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sat, 29 Sep 2001 14:31:00 -0400 Received: from mx7.port.ru ([194.67.57.17]:57079 "EHLO mx7.port.ru") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Sat, 29 Sep 2001 14:30:43 -0400 From: Samium Gromoff <_deepfire@mail.ru> Message-Id: <200109292253.f8TMrMG14132@vegae.deep.net> Subject: 2.4.10 - cerberized OK To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Date: Sun, 30 Sep 2001 02:53:21 +0400 (MSD) X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL6] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Okay folks, seems like the days when non-ac`ed 2.4 died after 15s of cerberus are gone... ;-) Today i made a 13h50m cerberization and it was pretty stable... Also i made a ac16 test, and i realised that ac16 was _much_ more responsive! Actually 2.4.10 have 70% cpu free (p166/24) and ttyS0-bound irc client (epic) stalled so much, that i hate it... 2.4.9-ac16 was more or less sane in these terms (1-2 sec max stalls) But actually i ran it only for 1.5 hurs on ac16, so ... cheers, Samium Gromoff