| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
bleakcabal
Guru
Joined: 10 Oct 2002
Posts: 301
Location: Montreal, Québec, Canada
|
 Posted: Tue Mar 16, 2004 3:22 am Post subject: With the latest 2.6.4 in portage, is Preemptible Kernel ok ? |
 |
|
| With the latest 2.6.4 devlopment sources ( vanilla ) in portage, is setting Preemptible Kernel ok or are there still troubles and bugs related to it ? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Fubarovic
Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 18 Aug 2003
Posts: 115
Location: Belgium
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 16, 2004 12:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I've been using kernel preemption since v2.4.20 (ck-sources) without any problems. Now I'm running kernel 2.6.3-evil6 (every kernel since 2.4.20 had preemption enabled) with an XFS-partition and nVIDIA-drivers (this combination was known to cause filecorruption to XFS-partitions) and I'm not having any problems whatsoever, stability or filesystem wise.
I think since 2.6.0, kernel preemption is in the vanilla-tree, so it should be stable.
_________________
Orbis non sufficit |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ebrostig
Bodhisattva
Joined: 20 Jul 2002
Posts: 3152
Location: Orlando, Fl
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 16, 2004 2:25 pm Post subject: Re: With the latest 2.6.4 in portage, is Preemptible Kernel |
|
|
| bleakcabal wrote: | | With the latest 2.6.4 devlopment sources ( vanilla ) in portage, is setting Preemptible Kernel ok or are there still troubles and bugs related to it ? |
Which problems are you hinting to?
I have also used it for generations of the kernel without any issues.
Erik
_________________
'Yes, Firefox is indeed greater than women. Can women block pops up for you? No. Can Firefox show you naked women? Yes.' |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bleakcabal
Guru
Joined: 10 Oct 2002
Posts: 301
Location: Montreal, Québec, Canada
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Lemma
Guru
Joined: 19 Apr 2002
Posts: 416
Location: Uppsala, Sweden
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 16, 2004 3:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
There was also a problem that was trigged (made more frequent, I think) by an activated preemtive flag in the kernel. Can't remember now, but it was during the 2.6-testing-x series; I run my servers using vanilla without preemting as a result, and I will continue untill I know that it is safe not to... I will try to dig up some info about it...
_________________
Always make it as simple as possible, but no simpler
/Einstein |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Lemma
Guru
Joined: 19 Apr 2002
Posts: 416
Location: Uppsala, Sweden
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 16, 2004 4:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Ok, found it.
_________________
Always make it as simple as possible, but no simpler
/Einstein |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jefklak
l33t
Joined: 26 Oct 2003
Posts: 818
Location: Belgium
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 16, 2004 4:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I yust recompiled my 2.6.4-mm1 with preemptive sheduling and everything seems fine. Thanks for the usefull link, Lemma! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Lemma
Guru
Joined: 19 Apr 2002
Posts: 416
Location: Uppsala, Sweden
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 16, 2004 5:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Jefklak wrote: | | I yust recompiled my 2.6.4-mm1 with preemptive sheduling and everything seems fine. Thanks for the usefull link, Lemma! |
No problem, it's all about helping our fellow man, right  .
I've had some problem with 2.6.4-mm1 and preemtive (couldn't boot all the way, the kernel killed itself trying to load ALSA...) but 2.6.4-mm2 is fine for me; the problem is that the preemtive-related problem in the link does not show for some time and so it is both hard to say if the kernel is stable or not and is therefore also very hard to correct. It may be gone, I don't know but as I said, until I do I will not enable preemtive on my servers (on my laptop, sure, but not the servers  ).
_________________
Always make it as simple as possible, but no simpler
/Einstein |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
Kernel & Hardware
