--- Dan MaleMalekn at daneembeddedalley> wrote: > > On Jan 22, 2006, at 8:24 PM, Frank wrote: > > > I remember reading a while back that the 2.6 kernel is > > considerably slower > > I wouldn't say "considerably" slower, but there are some > performance differences. It's most evident on the > smaller, slower processors, like the 8xx, but we have > taken steps to alleviate that. The problem is 2.6 is just > bigger with more stuff in it. You want the new features, > you have to pay for that somewhere. I think it would > help if the kernel was a little more configurable for > embedded systems. It seems there is just too much > stuff in a basic kernel that I wish could be stripped out. > > > I'm thinking about moving to 2.6 since a lot of open source > > projects have stopped suposuporting 2.4 kernel. > > You know, this is a "community effort", not "when are you > going to fix it for me" :-) Use 2.6, measure it using your > application, and submit updates that improve it. Some of > us have already done quite a bit, so do your part, too. > > Thanks. > > -- Dan
I wasn't implying problems with 2.6 kernel would preclude me from using it and fixing problems. I just wanted to know what to expect so I can adjust my schedule accordingly Thanks for the reply... __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
