Re: [2.4.17/18pre] VM and swap - it's really unusable

[Daniel Phillips]

On January 13, 2002 08:35 pm, J Sloan wrote:
> The problem here is that when people report
> that the low latency patch works better for them
> than the preempt patch, they aren't talking about
> bebnchmarking the time to compile a kernel, they
> are talking about interactive feel and smoothness.

Nobody is claiming the low latency patch works better than 
-preempt+lock_break, only that low latency can equal -preempt+lock_break, 
which is a claim I'm skeptical of, but oh well.

> I've no agenda other than wanting to see linux
> as an attractive option for the multimedia and
> gaming crowds - and in my experience, the low
> latency patches simply give a much smoother
> feel and a more pleasant experience. Kernel
> compilation time is the farthest thing from my
> mind when e.g. playing Q3A!

You need to read the thread *way* more closely ;-)

> I'd be happy to check out the preempt patch
> again and see if anything's changed, if the
> problem of tux+preempt oopsing has been
> dealt with -

Right, useful.

--
Daniel