Kernel comparison

lanark · Posted: Wed Nov 20, 2002 9:21 pm Post subject: Kernel comparison

I can get the difference between the vanilla kernel and the patched ones, but... what is the difference between the different patched kernels?
I mean, what is AA kernel better for than Gentoo kernel, and what is Gentoo one better for than AA...? and so on...
What kernel are you using? Why?
I want to start some kernel use experimentation... :wink:

_________________
·-=: lanark :=-·

Swishy · Guru Joined: 06 Jun 2002 Posts: 491 Location: NZ

currently im running 2.5.47 , want a resonably vanilla kernel and keep up with the latest dev's , havent had any stability issues so far and seems nice and responsive

preempt is native to

Cheers
Dale.
_________________
Theres no substitute for C.I.

Mnemia · Guru Joined: 17 May 2002 Posts: 476

Short of going to a development kernel like Swishy has, I'm not inclined to think that it makes too much difference unless you have problems with your hardware on a specific kernel. I generally use the gentoo kernel but I don't enable all the extra features it has. I just like to have them available to me with minimal fuss if I decide I want/need them later and the gentoo kernel has a lot of options for that. FWIW, all the kernels I've tried on Gentoo have been equally rock-solid (except when killed by buggy Radeon drivers, grr).

yokem55 · Guru Joined: 18 Apr 2002 Posts: 360 Location: Oregon

Do the nVidia drivers work right with the 2.5 kernel now, or do you still need to patch them to make them work?

Swishy · Guru Joined: 06 Jun 2002 Posts: 491 Location: NZ

work sweet as

assuming your refering to the Xdrivers not riva frame buffer support , fb is still broken at the moment although apparently theres a patch floating around somewhere I havent managed to find it yet though

Cheers
Dale.
_________________
Theres no substitute for C.I.

hook · Posted: Thu Nov 21, 2002 12:15 pm Post subject:

i've allways used vanilla kernels ...and am not intending to let them go ...worked perfectly for me (i always had a crooked machione;))
i mean ...is there anything that's better on a precompile?
_________________
tea+free software+law=hook

(deep inside i'm still a tux's little helper)

KiTaSuMbA · Guru Joined: 28 Jun 2002 Posts: 430 Location: Naples Italy

I'm currently running 2 different kernels:
- 2.4.19-xfs-r1 (I *know* I should go for -r2, just haven't got the time)
- 2.4.18-WOLK-3.7.1 Long name and loooong patches on it... It took me about an hour to go through the entire menuconfig (forgetting the UDF support- argh!!! no dvd!!!)... Promising, but has some glitches. It includes the ck patch for timeslice kernel autoregulation which seems to work nicely although in its first write-outs. It starts with pretty much the entire ram cached and as you start pushing (and real ram use goes up) the cache starts giving space without creating delays. Streaming divx while compiling and copying another 700MB avi from samba did not set my box on fire, so I guess it's pretty much ok. You can try it but don't throw away your "standard" kernel: YMMV
_________________
Need to flame people LIVE on IRC? Join #gentoo-otw on freenode!

lx · Posted: Thu Nov 21, 2002 4:02 pm Post subject:

I've always used vanilla kernel with some patches I wanted, but since I use 2.5 kernel I don't even need any patches, well since it's being developed I need some minor patches to get some version compiled ;-)

. 2.5 incorperates acpi / alsa / preempt and these are the major patches I switched, ;-)

. Well it's also very promising.....
_________________
"Remember there's a big difference between kneeling down and bending over.", Frank Zappa

gsfgf · Veteran Joined: 08 May 2002 Posts: 1266

i ran XFS until i switched to 2.5.
_________________
Aim:gsfgf0

jondkent · Apprentice Joined: 26 Jul 2002 Posts: 289 Location: London

I tend to try and run fairly vanilla kernel, although I patch them for XFS support. To be honest the other I've used (-ck, gentoo, -ac) haven't make a great deal of differance performance wise so thats why I tend to stay vanilla.

Jon

Qubax · Posted: Mon Nov 25, 2002 1:43 pm Post subject:

i'm using gentoo-sources, and tried out 2.5.46 - it worked, but it took my zip drive only when the disc was in the drive before booting. all the other things where working perfect. 2.5.47 i wasn't even able to make working - first it didn't find my hd - a bad thing if you want to boot - and then it had problems with my cpu, also not able to boot --> after all i'm staying with the gentoo-sources

lanark · Posted: Sat Nov 30, 2002 3:04 pm Post subject:

Thanks all for your comments...
I think I'll continue using gentoo-sources, which worked very well for me, and let the kernel experimentation for the moment I can study all the diff patches and consider which can help me better.
_________________
·-=: lanark :=-·

Gibberx · Apprentice Joined: 20 Oct 2002 Posts: 217 Location: UMBC

I'm using gentoo's 2.4.19-r10 for one reason: Supermount.

jthj · Posted: Sun Dec 01, 2002 6:55 am Post subject:

I've had very good luck with the gentoo kernels. I mainly use them over vanilla b/c of the pre-empt patch. And it's a very good patch :-)

.
_________________
01001010 01010100 01001000 01001010

tredman2 · Posted: Fri Dec 06, 2002 7:57 pm Post subject:

Lanark has a good questions, actually. One that I've been looking fruitlessly for the answer to. It would be nice to have some kind of matrix or listing saying what the feature sets of each kernel are. Some of them are pretty easy to figure out, like the -ac kernels. All you have to do is go out to Freshmeat and look it up. But others, like the gentoo-sources kernel, I haven't really seen anything specific about a feature set. The only thing that comes close is the chart in the installation instructions, but that only lists five of the 21 kernels currently in the portage tree.
_________________
Tim
"I drank what?" - Socrates, 399 BCE