Re: *massive* slowdowns on 2.4.1-pre1[1|2]

2001-01-30 Thread David Riley
Chris Wedgwood wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 11:17:58PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > You have to realize that stability takes precedence over > EVERYTHING. > > Are you sure his desciption describes only disk-slow down? Seems to > me something else is going on... why would

Re: *massive* slowdowns on 2.4.1-pre1[1|2]

2001-01-30 Thread Tobias Ringstrom
On Mon, 29 Jan 2001, Mark Hahn wrote: > > Kernel 2.4.1-pre11 and pre12 are both massively slower than 2.4.0 on the > > same machine, compiled with the same options. The machine is a Athlon > > 900 on a KT133 chipset. The slowdown is noticealbe in all areas... > > this is known: Linus decreed

Re: *massive* slowdowns on 2.4.1-pre1[1|2]

2001-01-30 Thread Michael B. Trausch
On 29 Jan 2001, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > You have to realize that stability takes precedence over EVERYTHING. > > Linus > At least with Linux, if something is *slow*, it generally works *perfect* or damn near close to it. I'll take that; over Microsoft's being slow AND buggy

Re: *massive* slowdowns on 2.4.1-pre1[1|2]

2001-01-30 Thread Michael B. Trausch
On 29 Jan 2001, Linus Torvalds wrote: You have to realize that stability takes precedence over EVERYTHING. Linus At least with Linux, if something is *slow*, it generally works *perfect* or damn near close to it. I'll take that; over Microsoft's being slow AND buggy AND

Re: *massive* slowdowns on 2.4.1-pre1[1|2]

2001-01-30 Thread Tobias Ringstrom
On Mon, 29 Jan 2001, Mark Hahn wrote: Kernel 2.4.1-pre11 and pre12 are both massively slower than 2.4.0 on the same machine, compiled with the same options. The machine is a Athlon 900 on a KT133 chipset. The slowdown is noticealbe in all areas... this is known: Linus decreed that,

Re: *massive* slowdowns on 2.4.1-pre1[1|2]

2001-01-30 Thread David Riley
Chris Wedgwood wrote: On Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 11:17:58PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote: You have to realize that stability takes precedence over EVERYTHING. Are you sure his desciption describes only disk-slow down? Seems to me something else is going on... why would speaker

Re: *massive* slowdowns on 2.4.1-pre1[1|2]

2001-01-29 Thread Linus Torvalds
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Mark Hahn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Kernel 2.4.1-pre11 and pre12 are both massively slower than 2.4.0 on the >> same machine, compiled with the same options. The machine is a Athlon >> 900 on a KT133 chipset. The slowdown is noticealbe in all areas... >

RE: *massive* slowdowns on 2.4.1-pre1[1|2]

2001-01-29 Thread Grover, Andrew
If you have ACPI enabled, it is the culprit. (I'm workin' on it! ;-) Anyway, ACPI driver is marked "developmental and/or incomplete" and will not be otherwise any time soon so it's broken-ness should IMO not hold up kernel releases. Regards -- Andy (ACPI maintainer) > -Original

Re: *massive* slowdowns on 2.4.1-pre1[1|2]

2001-01-29 Thread Mark Hahn
> Kernel 2.4.1-pre11 and pre12 are both massively slower than 2.4.0 on the > same machine, compiled with the same options. The machine is a Athlon > 900 on a KT133 chipset. The slowdown is noticealbe in all areas... this is known: Linus decreed that, since two people reported disk corruption

Re: *massive* slowdowns on 2.4.1-pre1[1|2]

2001-01-29 Thread Mark Hahn
Kernel 2.4.1-pre11 and pre12 are both massively slower than 2.4.0 on the same machine, compiled with the same options. The machine is a Athlon 900 on a KT133 chipset. The slowdown is noticealbe in all areas... this is known: Linus decreed that, since two people reported disk corruption on

Re: *massive* slowdowns on 2.4.1-pre1[1|2]

2001-01-29 Thread Linus Torvalds
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED], Mark Hahn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Kernel 2.4.1-pre11 and pre12 are both massively slower than 2.4.0 on the same machine, compiled with the same options. The machine is a Athlon 900 on a KT133 chipset. The slowdown is noticealbe in all areas... this is known: