2.6.0-love1 (and 2.6.0-love2)

Message

fizz · Post by **fizz** » Mon Dec 29, 2003 7:07 pm

so to take full advantage of the nvidia agp patch, would i NOT include support for agpgart? i havent compiled that in the kernel for a long time anywayz.

Wedge_ · Post by **Wedge_** » Mon Dec 29, 2003 7:33 pm

fizz wrote:so to take full advantage of the nvidia agp patch, would i NOT include support for agpgart?

Nope. Unless I'm thinking of the wrong nvidia-agp patch

all that it does is add a function to the existing code in the kernel which seems to break AGP on Epox 8RDA boards if it isn't there. I have the same board as you, and it doesn't seem to have any effect either way on the A7N8X. Set the AGP options in the kernel the same way you normally would.

relyt · Post by **relyt** » Mon Dec 29, 2003 10:34 pm

steel300 wrote:Yet To Do:
Runtime Selectable Block Scheduler

I have fixed these patches for -love2 (and -mm2) and combined them into one patch. I can send this to people, but maybe there's someone out there with web space who will post it?

neenee · Post by **neenee** » Mon Dec 29, 2003 11:18 pm

i could host it - send it to neeneelaatmaar@gmx.net;
i'll post a link once it's up.

fca · Post by **fca** » Mon Dec 29, 2003 11:19 pm

relyt wrote:
steel300 wrote:Yet To Do:
Runtime Selectable Block Scheduler
I have fixed these patches for -love2 (and -mm2) and combined them into one patch. I can send this to people, but maybe there's someone out there with web space who will post it?

I could host them. I already have a variety of ebuilds and such on my server. But also send it to steel300, he can incorporate it into the love patchset, which I cannot.

neenee · Post by **neenee** » Mon Dec 29, 2003 11:59 pm

elv-select patch provided by relyt

dedeaux · Post by **dedeaux** » Tue Dec 30, 2003 1:04 am

hey folks!

thanks for the hard work on this patchset. I am currently running the love2 set.

I was just wanting to inquire as to how to see the performance boost on the desktop.

I use grub as my boot loader and have this line:

Code: Select all

kernel (hd0,1)/boot/bzImage root=/dev/hda4 elevator=cfq

in my grub.conf

Is this correct? I have used both gentoo 2.6 and love2 patched 2.6 and see no improvement.

I am glad to see it working as earlier test kernels wouldn't work.

I still get random lockups on boot or kernel panics on boot, but overall the system is stable.

Thanks for the help.

dabooty · Post by **dabooty** » Tue Dec 30, 2003 1:23 am

since you're all very much concerned with kernel performance, you might wanna have a look at this thread i just started

dedeaux · Post by **dedeaux** » Tue Dec 30, 2003 1:36 am

thanks dabooty, I read your thread and will reply.... but I was asking about the kernel flag 'elevator=cfq' as it has been said to offer the best performance. I know this is all relative to our systems and setup -- I just wanted confirmation that it was correct as I see no difference.

neenee · Post by **neenee** » Tue Dec 30, 2003 11:38 am

yes. elevator=cfq in the kernel line is correct
like that. that scheduler is not really for per-
formance, but for good responsiviness under
high load i believe; watching a movie while
emerging world and such.

(please correct me if i am wrong)

asimon · Post by **asimon** » Tue Dec 30, 2003 4:44 pm

I just asked myself if anyone does actually review all those patches? Just wondering how easy it would be to get some evil(tm) code into the love-sources...

relyt · Post by **relyt** » Tue Dec 30, 2003 6:24 pm

asimon wrote:I just asked myself if anyone does actually review all those patches? Just wondering how easy it would be to get some evil(tm) code into the love-sources...

You make a good point. The answer is that most of the 'review' done at this level comes from being discriminating about where you accept patches from.

To make people feel better about my patch (in particular), here it is, presented as a patch to the elv-select.patch that Nick has posted:

Code: Select all

--- elv-select.patch    2003-12-30 12:54:02.000000000 -0500
+++ elv-select.patch    2003-12-30 13:08:12.000000000 -0500
@@ -77,7 +77,7 @@
                return;
   
 -      elevator_exit(q);
-+      if (e->elevator)
++      if (q->elevator)
 +              elevator_exit(q);
   
        del_timer_sync(&q->unplug_timer);
@@ -740,10 +740,8 @@
   
        ad->current_batch_expires = jiffies + ad->batch_expire[REQ_SYNC];
        ad->write_batch_count = ad->batch_expire[REQ_ASYNC] / 10;
-@@ -1823,8 +1786,58 @@ static int as_init(request_queue_t *q, e
+@@ -1823,6 +1786,56 @@ static int as_init(request_queue_t *q, e
                ad->write_batch_count = 2;
-
-       ad->new_success = 512;
 +}
   
 -      return 0;

Apply this patch to Nick Piggin's patch, then apply it the your tree, then apply Nick's elv-init-cleanup patch and you'll have what I made. You can see that all I did was fix the e/q mistake, and remove two lines that are no longer in one of the the source files.

PrakashP · Post by **PrakashP** » Wed Dec 31, 2003 11:17 am

2.6.1-rc1-mm1 is out...

lems · Post by **lems** » Wed Dec 31, 2003 11:34 am

By the way: There's a new ALSA Kernel patch available.
http://www.alsa-project.org/alsa/ftp/ke ... 0.patch.gz

asimon · Post by **asimon** » Wed Dec 31, 2003 1:23 pm

lems wrote:By the way: There's a new ALSA Kernel patch available.
http://www.alsa-project.org/alsa/ftp/ke ... 0.patch.gz

Yes, apart from 5 small rejects it applies cleanly to mm2. The rejected stuff is already in mm2.

didl · Post by **didl** » Wed Dec 31, 2003 2:29 pm

2.6.1-rc1-mm1 is out

asimon · Post by **asimon** » Wed Dec 31, 2003 2:42 pm

didl wrote:
2.6.1-rc1-mm1 is out

I just booted into 2.6.1-rc-1-mm1 with alsa-bk-2003-12-30 and Con's 2.6.0-am-5.

didl · Post by **didl** » Wed Dec 31, 2003 3:00 pm

asimon wrote:
didl wrote:
2.6.1-rc1-mm1 is out
I just booted into 2.6.1-rc-1-mm1 with alsa-bk-2003-12-30 and Con's 2.6.0-am-5.

Alsa doesn't apply very nicely to 2.6.1-rc-1-mm1 for me! A few hunks fail.
Did you do anything to fix this??

asimon · Post by **asimon** » Wed Dec 31, 2003 3:42 pm

didl wrote: Alsa doesn't apply very nicely to 2.6.1-rc-1-mm1 for me! A few hunks fail. Did you do anything to fix this??

No, I did nothing to "fix" it. It's the same as above with 2.6.0-mm2. The few hunks which fail are already part of 2.6.0-mm2 and 2.6.1-rc-1-mm1 (looks like these are mostly spinlock fixes):
./sound/i2c/i2c.c.rej
./sound/isa/gus/gus_pcm.c.rej
./sound/core/sound.c.rej
./sound/sound_core.c.rej
./include/sound/i2c.h.rej

Sound is working fine here.

Roguelazer · Post by **Roguelazer** » Wed Dec 31, 2003 8:59 pm

So... anyone found 2.6.1-rc1-love1 yet?

Dinini · Post by **Dinini** » Thu Jan 01, 2004 12:45 pm

bootsplash-3.1.3 applies to 2.6.1-rc1-mm1 with one small change.
(The "struct device *dev; /* pointer to the device for this fb */" line is new and is what causes the sole reject.)

Code: Select all

--- linux/include/linux/fb.h.orig     2004-01-01 05:49:13.422361696 -0600
+++ linux/include/linux/fb.h  2004-01-01 05:54:38.732906976 -0600
@@ -414,6 +414,14 @@
    int currcon;                                /* Current VC. */       
    void *pseudo_palette;                /* Fake palette of 16 colors */ 
    struct device *dev;                  /* pointer to the device for this fb */
+#ifdef CONFIG_BOOTSPLASH
+   struct splash_data *splash_data;
+   unsigned char *splash_pic;
+   int splash_pic_size;
+   int splash_bytes;
+   char *silent_screen_base;          /* real screen base */
+   char fb_cursordata[64];
+#endif
    /* From here on everything is device dependent */
    void *par;  
 };

nepenthe · Post by **nepenthe** » Fri Jan 02, 2004 5:02 pm

miss you love-sources...

2.6.0-love1 (and 2.6.0-love2)

Re: 2.6.0-love1 (and 2.6.0-love2)

Re: 2.6.0-love1 (and 2.6.0-love2)

performance