Bug#377959: problem exists also in 2.6.17.6

2007-01-16 Thread Toni Mueller 

Hi,

On Tue, 16.01.2007 at 16:08:09 +0100, maximilian attems <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
> how is linux image 2.6.18 performing?

well... I didn't specifically check (and also forgot about this bug),
but 2.6.18 is reasonably fast, or at least fast enough that I don't
have too many problems with it.


Best,
--Toni++



-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Bug#377959: problem exists also in 2.6.17.6

2007-01-16 Thread maximilian attems 
On Mon, 17 Jul 2006, Toni Mueller wrote:

> 
> Hello,
> 
> I just created a 2.6.17.6 kernel (patch as of yesterday), and tried
> again, with much the same results. So, I suspect it's somewhere in the
> guts of the 2.6.17 kernel - switching back to 2.6.16 also brings
> performance back to acceptable levels (already included in the report).
> 
> Should I report this bug upstream?
> 
> 
> Best,
> --Toni++

how is linux image 2.6.18 performing?

thanks for an update.

-- 
maks


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Bug#377959: problem exists also in 2.6.17.6

2006-07-17 Thread Toni Mueller 

Hello,

I just created a 2.6.17.6 kernel (patch as of yesterday), and tried
again, with much the same results. So, I suspect it's somewhere in the
guts of the 2.6.17 kernel - switching back to 2.6.16 also brings
performance back to acceptable levels (already included in the report).

Should I report this bug upstream?


Best,
--Toni++



-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]