| 1 |
On Dienstag 20 April 2010, Nikos Chantziaras wrote: |
| 2 |
> On 04/20/2010 05:41 PM, Helmut Jarausch wrote: |
| 3 |
> > On 20 Apr, Volker Armin Hemmann wrote: |
| 4 |
> >> On Dienstag 20 April 2010, Helmut Jarausch wrote: |
| 5 |
> >>> Hi, |
| 6 |
> >>> |
| 7 |
> >>> has anybody experience with these new sys-kernel/ck-sources? |
| 8 |
> >>> I could only see they have additional patches (in addition to those |
| 9 |
> >>> of gentoo-sources). |
| 10 |
> >>> But I didn't find which patches and why these have only been applied to |
| 11 |
> >>> ck-sources? |
| 12 |
> >>> |
| 13 |
> >>> Thanks for your opinion, |
| 14 |
> >>> Helmut. |
| 15 |
> >> |
| 16 |
> >> if you have more than 2 cores, you shouldn't use them ;) |
| 17 |
> > |
| 18 |
> > Why, it's said to scale well up to 16 cores (at least)? |
| 19 |
> |
| 20 |
> It's practically *made* for 2 and 4 cores. Single core enhancements |
| 21 |
> were added later. |
| 22 |
> |
| 23 |
> Volker's recommendations is based on his own tests with the patches. |
| 24 |
> I'm on a dual core Intel E6600 and the patches help a big deal to keep |
| 25 |
> the GUI responsive and fluid. |
| 26 |
> |
| 27 |
> Also note that there's much hate and fanboy-ism around this issue. |
| 28 |
> Expect people telling you how this is crap, or how the default Linux |
| 29 |
> scheduler is crap, etc, without them really having a clue what they're |
| 30 |
> talking about. (I am *not* referring to Volker here, mind you.) |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
to be honest - whenever I try ck patches I see zero improvements - so I stay |
| 33 |
with my usual kernel-policy: the less patches the better and scrap them. |
Archives