--- Carlos Munoz wrote:
> Frank wrote:
>
> >I remember reading a while back that the 2.6 kernel is
> >considerably slower then the 2.4 kernel (Wolfgang Denx). Has
> >anybody taken any performance measurements on a later kernel
> >version to see if the above still hods true?
> >
> >I'm thinking
On Wed, Jan 25, 2006 at 07:45:38AM -0800, Dan Malek wrote:
> 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 wi
Frank wrote:
>I remember reading a while back that the 2.6 kernel is
>considerably slower then the 2.4 kernel (Wolfgang Denx). Has
>anybody taken any performance measurements on a later kernel
>version to see if the above still hods true?
>
>I'm thinking about moving to 2.6 since a lot of open sou
--- 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
>
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 t
I remember reading a while back that the 2.6 kernel is
considerably slower then the 2.4 kernel (Wolfgang Denx). Has
anybody taken any performance measurements on a later kernel
version to see if the above still hods true?
I'm thinking about moving to 2.6 since a lot of open source
projects have st
