From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1EMmFI-0008WJ-Fq for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Tue, 04 Oct 2005 12:50:12 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.5/8.13.5) with SMTP id j94Cf7wi002802; Tue, 4 Oct 2005 12:41:07 GMT Received: from core1.needhosting.net (core1.needhosting.net [65.254.55.226]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.5/8.13.5) with ESMTP id j94CbTjd011356 for ; Tue, 4 Oct 2005 12:37:29 GMT Received: from [69.212.228.113] (helo=[192.168.1.2] ident=yWykUGyKnj0) by core1.needhosting.net with esmtpsa (SSLv3:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.52) id 1EMmAw-0006PZ-Jw for gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org; Tue, 04 Oct 2005 08:45:42 -0400 Message-ID: <43427976.7080009@fire-eyes.org> Date: Tue, 04 Oct 2005 08:45:42 -0400 From: fire-eyes User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7.12) Gecko/20050927 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] [smp related] 2.6.13 is 10x slower than 2.6.12! References: <1127788864.11645.20.camel@orpheus> <1128387470.12718.3.camel@orpheus> In-Reply-To: <1128387470.12718.3.camel@orpheus> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - core1.needhosting.net X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - lists.gentoo.org X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - fire-eyes.org X-Source: X-Source-Args: X-Source-Dir: X-Archives-Salt: 9b5c2174-d09a-4757-ae0a-6b61ddcf3ee2 X-Archives-Hash: 5dadbb1f3b972286346eb13f755d6197 Iain Buchanan wrote: > Not long ago, I griped about 2.6.13 being _very_ slow to boot and run. > My original email is at the bottom. > > I've since recompiled the kernel without SMP and Hyperthreading, and the > system is _much_ faster. > > So, there is a problem with 2.6.13 and SMP or Hyperthreaded machines. > Can anyone else confirm this? What should I do? Is there a kernel.org > bugzilla? Or perhaps I should put it in the gentoo bugzilla? > > Any pointers would be appreciated... > > thanks. > > On Tue, 2005-09-27 at 12:11 +0930, Iain Buchanan wrote: Curious. I have used many kernels on many real (2 physical cpus) SMP systems, and have never had problems. In fact they are all currently running 2.6.13 or higher. I haven't used anything on HT cpus though, so I don't know about that. -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list