From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261605AbUEQPIS (ORCPT ); Mon, 17 May 2004 11:08:18 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261580AbUEQPGx (ORCPT ); Mon, 17 May 2004 11:06:53 -0400 Received: from bay18-f106.bay18.hotmail.com ([65.54.187.156]:46861 "EHLO hotmail.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261602AbUEQPGQ (ORCPT ); Mon, 17 May 2004 11:06:16 -0400 X-Originating-IP: [141.156.159.253] X-Originating-Email: [jpiszcz@hotmail.com] From: "Justin Piszcz" To: baldrick@free.fr, gene.heskett@verizon.net Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Linux 2.6.6 appears to be 3 to 4 times slower than 2.6.5. Date: Mon, 17 May 2004 15:06:15 +0000 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 17 May 2004 15:06:16.0011 (UTC) FILETIME=[802A91B0:01C43C20] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Sorry to all, it turns out (in two separate cases I had two different problems that affected the results). Case 1: No SMP turned on for CPU w/HT after fix (~4.78 seconds compile time (2.6GHZ w/HT)) Case 2: Box had 4GB of NON-ECC memory in it, only recognized 2.56GB, took out (2) 1GB DDR DIMM's, and the speed returned what it should be. (~4.3 seconds compile time (3.0GHZ w/HT)) The control box was a 2.53GHZ (533MHZ BUS w/NO HT) = ~5.3seconds I have not tested 2.6.6 recently, but in one of my tests I believe it worked OK, ever since 2.6.6 removed my /etc/lilo.conf and /etc/mtab and several other files, I do not wish to touch that kernel with a 10 foot poll :-P due to the IDE disk flush/cache issue. >From: Duncan Sands >To: gene.heskett@verizon.net, "Justin Piszcz" >CC: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org >Subject: Re: Linux 2.6.6 appears to be 3 to 4 times slower than 2.6.5. >Date: Mon, 17 May 2004 10:07:17 +0200 > > > I noted that my epson C82 usb printer was running about 25% of its > > normal speed last night, it took gimp-print several hours to do half > > a dozen 8x10's in 720dpi. gkrellm's display looks normal though, > > with setiathome currently taking 90+% of the cpu, which is normal. > >2.6.6 or 2.6.6 plus patches from BK or -mm? > >Thanks, > >Duncan. _________________________________________________________________ Best Restaurant Giveaway Ever! Vote for your favorites for a chance to win $1 million! http://local.msn.com/special/giveaway.asp