Just to follow up, I compiled 2.4.16 with the
low latency patch from Andrew Morton, as
well as the 2.4.16-disk-i/o-responsiveness
patch from Andrew, and tux-full-2.4.16-A3.
I hammered tux all night with an apachebench
script, and it never hiccupped. So, while tux
and preempt don't play well together, tux and
low-latency seem to get along just fine.
Regards,
jjs
J Sloan wrote:
> I built 2.4.16+low-latency+preempt+tux2, and
> started testing it. To my horror, the webserver
> died - I checked the logs and found an oops -
> (for your edification, I attach it below)
>
> So, I figured, preempt and low latency don't
> mix well - I'll just build a kernel with tux and
> preempt.
>
> To my horror, the new kernel without the
> low latency patch oopsed immediately as
> well, as soon as I started an apachebench
> run from a remote testing box.
>
> (for you edification, I include this oops also)
>
> I removed the preempt patch and basically
> compiled just 2.4.16+tux, and hammered on
> it for several hours - rock solid.
>
> So, there is an issue with tux and the preempt
> patch - I've got big plans for tux atm, so for
> now I will have to do without preempt -
>
> Thanks & Regards,
>
> jjs
>
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Nov 30 2001 - 21:00:33 EST