[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: On linux kernel packaging issue

On Sat, Nov 08, 2003 at 01:20:00PM +0300, Nikita V. Youshchenko wrote:
> > #include <hallo.h>
> >
> > * Nikita V. Youshchenko [Sat, Nov 08 2003, 12:39:58PM]:
> > > Optimization is a serious issue too. Unlike most user space software,
> > > using 386 kernel on modern PC will cause serious performance loose.
> > > Especially if you consider mmx/sse/... and SMP issues. Note also that
> > > not all drivers are compatible with SMP, etc.
> >
> > Except of SMP, how exactly does optimisation of the KERNEL CODE help
> > you? Your filesystem driver may become 2-3% faster, but the disk won't
> > speed up at all, haha.
> Have you ever tried to compare preprocessesd files from kernel/ and arch/
> i386/kernel/ when compiling for 386 and for Athlon?
> If not, try to.
> They do differ.
> Cpu-specific task management, IRQ processing, cache alignment, etc is 
> being used on higher processors.

Please provide carefully documented evidence of the performance gains
that you are claiming, not handwaving. Evidence of a difference is not
the same thing; anybody who has any experience with low-level
programming knows that differences are as likely to cause a
performance loss as they are to cause a gain. More so, in fact; it's
easier to make code slower than it is to make it faster.

We're all very interested in *real* evidence here, because there
hasn't been any in the past. If you don't have any evidence, you can
expect people to call bullshit on this.

  .''`.  ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
 : :' :  http://www.debian.org/ |
 `. `'                          |
   `-             -><-          |

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: