Re: Linux 2.4.17 vs 2.2.19 vs rml new VM

From: J Sloan (
Date: Wed Jan 02 2002 - 14:07:35 EST

Just .02 from the peanut gallery -

It would be interesting if you were to compare and
contrast 2.4.17-preempt with 2.4.17-low-latency.

I find the low latency patch makes a noticeable
difference in e.g. q3a and rtcw - OTOH I have
not been able to discern any tangible difference
from the stock kernel when using -preempt.


jjs wrote:

>I'd like to say that as of 2.4.17 w/preempt patch, the linux kernel
>seems again to perform as well as 2.2.19 for interactive use and
>reliability, at least in my use.
>2.4.17 still croaks running some of the giant memory applications
>that I run successfully on 2.2.19. (Machines with 2GB of RAM
>running 3GB+ apps.)
>I tried rmap-10 new VM and under my typical load my desktop machine
>froze repeatedly. Seemed the memory pool was going down the drain
>before the freeze. Meaning apps were failing and getting stuck in
>various odd states.
>No doubt, preempt and rmap-10 are incompatible, but I'm not going to
>give up the preempt patch any time soon.
>All in all 2.4.17 w/preempt is very satisfactory.

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Jan 07 2002 - 21:00:17 EST