Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Linux 2.6.20-rc6 Kernel Performance 226

Posted by CmdrTaco
from the up-and-to-the-right dept.
Michael writes "The Linux 2.6.20 kernel will feature KVM support, Playstation 3 support, and a variety of other improvements. With the Linux 2.6.20-rc6 kernel out the door, Phoronix has written a performance comparison of the Linux 2.6.20-rc6 kernel against the 2.6.19 and 2.6.19.2 kernels in a variety of benchmarks."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Linux 2.6.20-rc6 Kernel Performance

Comments Filter:
  • PS-3 (Score:2, Insightful)

    by kevin_conaway (585204)

    Why is playstation support being included in the kernel? Is that really necessary?

    Furthermore, the article didn't exactly make it clear what the support is. Can anyone clarify?

    • Re:PS-3 (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 31, 2007 @11:50AM (#17828168)
      Why is anything in the kernel tree? Jeesh -- why don't you complain about the whole gamut of processors included. Just because it's supported doesn't mean you have to build for that arch. To each his own -- pick the proc(s) you need.
    • Re:PS-3 (Score:5, Informative)

      by jimstapleton (999106) on Wednesday January 31, 2007 @11:51AM (#17828182) Journal
      I think that means that it is bootable on a PS3. This kind of thing would only be included if it was compiled for a PS3, and as for "is it required", only if you want to run arbitrary distros on a PS3, which there are people who'd want to do that.
    • Re:PS-3 (Score:5, Insightful)

      by qwertphobia (825473) on Wednesday January 31, 2007 @11:52AM (#17828198)

      Why is playstation support being included in the kernel? Is that really necessary?

      Yeah, don't forget why most folks start tinkering with Linux in the first place.
      • We love to tinker
      • We want closer access to the hardware
      • Somebody told us we can't, so that just makes us want to all the more
      All three apply to the PS3, as far as I'm concerned!
      • by 0racle (667029)
        Who told you you couldn't put linux on the PS3?
    • Re:PS-3 (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Ultra64 (318705) on Wednesday January 31, 2007 @11:52AM (#17828202)
      Why is playstation support being included in the kernel?

      Why is there x86 support in the kernel? why is there PowerPC support in the kernel?

      To make linux run on these systems. Duh.
      • by misleb (129952)
        I must admit that I was also little puzzled by "PS3 support in the kernel." For some reason my first thought was that you could play PS3 games under some kind of kernel based emulation. So this is a "duh" moment for me as well.

        -matthew
    • Re:PS-3 (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Bluesman (104513) on Wednesday January 31, 2007 @11:59AM (#17828306) Homepage
      I bought a PS-3 for the sole reason that I want to run Linux on it to use as a cheap, quiet server, and play with the Cell processor, which I think should be pretty fast for DSP and software radio applications.

      I'm pretty excited about the Cell, and the Playstation is an incredible value for a small form-factor computer that you can put next to your TV without having fan noise be a bother.

      Why not support it in the Linux kernel?
      • you bought the PS3 to be a cheap server?
        1) Server of what exactly?
        2) How's that workin' out for you?
        • Re:PS-3 (Score:5, Interesting)

          by Bluesman (104513) on Wednesday January 31, 2007 @12:50PM (#17829102) Homepage
          1) A file/subversion server for my home network.
          2) It's not, yet. It's arriving today via UPS.

          And the main reason I bought it was not as a server, although that's certainly a benefit. I'm more interested in development on the Cell.

          • I was all ready to do the same 'til I heard $800.
        • Did you miss something? Go check the PS3's specs aside from RAM and get back to me about the price/performance for server workloads.
          • by drinkypoo (153816)

            Did you miss something? Go check the PS3's specs aside from RAM and get back to me about the price/performance for server workloads.

            First of all, you cannot discount the importance of RAM. For typical server loads, it's dramatically more important than, say, CPU.

            Second, the PS3 is a horrible deal in terms of a server. The SPEs, which give it basically all its power, will be virtually unutilized in any typical server context. The Processor is about equivalent to a mid-to-late Pentium III. I/O bandwidth to

      • Same here (Score:5, Interesting)

        by this great guy (922511) on Wednesday January 31, 2007 @02:54PM (#17830710)
        I also bought a PS3 two weeks ago primarily to develop on the Cell processor. So far, I have written a prototype application that runs 5x faster on the PS3's Cell than on the highest end Woodcrest Xeon at 3.0 GHz. When I am not coding on it, I am also using it as a Blu-ray player. Given all this, plus the fact that the PS3 is a next-gen console (though I don't plan to buy any game), I am probably one of the few to recognize that $500 is dirty cheap for such a polyvant device !
      • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

        by Trogre (513942)
        So tell me, when you boot up your kernel how many penguins do you see?

        Inquiring minds want to know. Thanks.

    • Why not? (Score:4, Interesting)

      by brunes69 (86786) <slashdot@nOsPAm.keirstead.org> on Wednesday January 31, 2007 @12:00PM (#17828318) Homepage
      It's support for the cell, and some PS3 hardware.

      Why would it not be included? If the kernel is still shipping support for 15 year old legacy ISA hardware (yes it is) and Cyrix X86 optimization s(yes it is), it can include support for the PS3, which is likely more in use than either of the above.

      There is support for hardware in the kernel that is so obscure that there are probably less than 100 people in the world still using it. There's nothing wrong with this - this is why Open Source beats closed source for overall hardware support - as long as someone is around using it, and someone else maintaining it, there is no reason to remove support for it.
      • Re:Why not? (Score:5, Informative)

        by steveha (103154) on Wednesday January 31, 2007 @01:19PM (#17829522) Homepage
        There is support for hardware in the kernel that is so obscure that there are probably less than 100 people in the world still using it.

        I attended FreedomHEC in Seattle last year. Greg Kroah-Hartman gave a talk, and one point he made was that there are devices supported by the Linux kernel that are literally known to have only one or two users in the whole world; we are talking devices that are so obscure that only one or two people are known to even possess the hardware.

        The point he was making is: if you make some hardware, and you are wondering whether your device is too obscure for Linux to accept drivers for it... don't wonder, just submit the drivers.

        steveha
    • Does anyone know how much of the PS3's hardware is actually supported? When you run Linux on Cell, is it actually using all of the Cell cores, or is it just using the main (PPC-like) one?

      It seems like Cell is probably going to be a lackluster performer, if only the single main processor is used; at that point it's just like using a 3 or 4 year old PowerPC system. But if Linux can support its additional hardware and coprocessors, it seems like you could do some neat stuff with it; I'd think that you could ma
      • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 31, 2007 @12:11PM (#17828498)
        7SPE's are accessible via Linux, as long as you use the Cell BBE SDK..
      • The only thing that is limited is GPU support. Sony doesn't want you running pirated or homebrew games on it, so now graphics hardware acceleration (until someone writes an unofficial driver).
        • by tlhIngan (30335) <slashdot@wor f . n et> on Wednesday January 31, 2007 @12:59PM (#17829244)

          The only thing that is limited is GPU support. Sony doesn't want you running pirated or homebrew games on it, so now graphics hardware acceleration (until someone writes an unofficial driver).
          I've played with PS3 linux. I can tell you, the hypervisor is just that. It virtualizes the PS3 hardware. About the only thing Linux has "raw" access to (which could also be virtualized) are the USB ports.

          The hard disk must be PS3-formatted before Linux will see it. Otherwise the hypervisor will not see it and make it available.

          BTW: /dev/sda - hard disk, if available (else this node is the following devices.) /dev/sdb - flash memory - configuration area storing the bootloader (kboot), and a few configuration flags /dev/sdc - Memory stick, I believe /dev/sdd - SD Card /dev/sde - CompactFlash card /dev/sr0 - blu-ray drive.

          The hypervisor is a lot like VMWare/Virtual PC/etc. I suspect the Power Processing Elements aren't even fully accessible and that the hypervisor is trapping everything and passing it on as appropriate, like virtualization software you run.

          BTW, the virtualization also causes some issues. When I bought a new hard disk for PS3 Linux, it had bad sectors on it (I returned it in the end), but instead of the usual IDE error messages (DriveError) or SCSI errors (with media sense keys), you get nothing, other than a generic "I/O Error reading sector XXXX", which causes the filesystem in use to suddenly go read-only (not sure if ext3 did that or if the hypervisor just disabled the ability to write to the disk - I never had many bad disks with ext3). Basically, you don't even know it's a bad sector as it isn't reported. I suspected it when I could get dd to consistently put the filesystem into read-only mode 16GB in. Another system helped prove the point.

          The video hardware is identical - it's virtualized the same way. It's not a driver issue - it's just that Sony has virtualized the video hardware away, and there's no direct access available. Heck, there aren't any WiFi devices accessible either - not for lack of a driver, but that Sony didn't make the WiFi hardware accessible.
          • by Kadin2048 (468275) <slashdot DOT kadin AT xoxy DOT net> on Wednesday January 31, 2007 @02:20PM (#17830248) Homepage Journal
            I've played with PS3 linux. I can tell you, the hypervisor is just that. It virtualizes the PS3 hardware. ...

            I don't know about anybody else, but I find this just conceptually fascinating. Where does the hypervisor run from, anyway? Is it in the machine's ROM, so that there's no way to prevent it from booting? (Without irreversible hardware modifications.)

            I was just wondering whether it's possible to get rid of it, and boot Linux on the bare metal, or whether the hypervisor is tied into the hardware so tightly, it's impossible to remove and install a new Domain 0 operating system.

            Getting Linux to run on the bare metal, 'below' the hypervisor, will be an interesting exercise in what I suspect may be a large part of the future of "unauthorized" computing. I don't think it'll be long before most consumer systems have something like that in place, so it'll be a good intellectual challenge, if nothing else, to see if it can be gotten around.
          • by cxreg (44671)
            About the only thing Linux has "raw" access to (which could also be virtualized) are the USB ports.

            Not even that. The USB bus appears to linux to be on top of a PCI bus, which the ps3 does not have.
      • by drinkypoo (153816) <martin.espinoza@gmail.com> on Wednesday January 31, 2007 @12:17PM (#17828564) Homepage Journal

        Does anyone know how much of the PS3's hardware is actually supported? When you run Linux on Cell, is it actually using all of the Cell cores, or is it just using the main (PPC-like) one?

        Cell as implemented in the PS3 has 8 cells. One is disabled (probably due to poor yields when demanding that all 8 be working.) In Linux, one is devoted to kernel tasks. That leaves you with six Cell SPEs to work with besides the PPC PPE.

        Seems like getting software to take advantage of it, would require changes both to the kernel, and also to GCC, in order to produce optimized binaries for it, not to mention various pieces of software themselves (rewriting for greater parallelizability).

        Well, yes and no. The real problem is that the SPEs are only good for vector data. Anything else requires that you underutilize them. For instance if you have just two numbers and not a whole matrix to multiply, it takes equally long - you just have one useful result and a bunch of useless results that you didn't want. So certain kinds of tasks will be easier to optimize on the SPEs than others. But in many cases you can probably get good results by just using libraries... for instance if libz and libm were accelerated, that would probably make a big difference. Likewise for widget libraries, sound processing libraries, 3d...

        3d brings us to the other point, which is that Linux runs in the PS3 "hypervisor" environment and you do not have unfettered access to the video hardware. I don't know precisely what you're not allowed to do that you can do in the commercial environment though; I've never seen a complete description of that.

        • Does anyone know how much of the PS3's hardware is actually supported? When you run Linux on Cell, is it actually using all of the Cell cores, or is it just using the main (PPC-like) one?

          Cell as implemented in the PS3 has 8 cells. One is disabled (probably due to poor yields when demanding that all 8 be working.) In Linux, one is devoted to kernel tasks. That leaves you with six Cell SPEs to work with besides the PPC PPE.

          You didn't answer the parent's question completely, I think. Which cell is the kernel using (I'm assuming the PPC PPE), and more importantly, does the PS3 support in the Linux kernel enable access to the Six Cell SPEs in anyway, or are you basically on your own.

          3d brings us to the other point, which is that Linux runs in the PS3 "hypervisor" environment and you do not have unfettered access to the video hardware. I don't know precisely what you're not allowed to do that you can do in the commercial environment though; I've never seen a complete description of that.

          Seems like that defeats the whole purpose doesn't it? PS3 is all about the 3D graphics.

          • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

            by drinkypoo (153816)

            You didn't answer the parent's question completely, I think. Which cell is the kernel using (I'm assuming the PPC PPE), and more importantly, does the PS3 support in the Linux kernel enable access to the Six Cell SPEs in anyway, or are you basically on your own.

            This paragraph proves that you do not know what we are talking about.

            The PowerPC in the "Cell" processor in the PS3 is not, repeat NOT a "Cell". It is known as the PPE, or Primary Processing Element (IIRC.) The actual Cell processors in the PS3 ar

            • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

              by SpectreHiro (961765)

              This paragraph proves that you do not know what we are talking about.

              Well, I think that's self-evident, since he's asking a question about it.

              The PowerPC in the "Cell" processor in the PS3 is not, repeat NOT a "Cell". It is known as the PPE, or Primary Processing Element (IIRC.) The actual Cell processors in the PS3 are known as the SPEs. I forget what the S stands for, maybe synergistic or something like that. I honestly cannot remember and the information is out there so YOU can look it up :)

              The chip in the PS3 has one PPE (a PowerPC with VERY roughly the processing power of a late-model pentium III) and eight SPEs or Cell cores. One of those cores is disabled, probably in order to improve yields. The Linux kernel runs on both the PPE, and ONE of the SPEs. The other six available SPEs are available to the user. Note that all of this information appears in the comment to which you replied, but I am now being more redundant and overusing emphasis in an attempt to get you to actually read it.

              If I could offer a couple clarifications (although I'm surely no expert):

              1. The PPE stands for Power Processing Element (IIRC).
              2. The S in SPE does in fact stand for Synergistic.
              3. I've never heard anyone, in any article or any of the whitepapers I've read, refer to the SPEs as Cell processors, Cell cores or Cells. The Cell Broadband Engine is the entire chip, while the SPEs are precisely that... SPEs. The root of the confusion in thi
        • by acidrain (35064)

          With the exception of the SPU, most modern hardware spends almost all of it's time on cache misses and branch stalls. The spu however, doesn't have a deep pipeline, or have cache misses, meaning it gets a lot more done than the PPU even while running non-vector math code. Just because you haven't switched up your code to take advantage of vector math optimizations doesn't make it under-utilized, it just means that you skip past the typical bottle-neck and now vector math *may* be your next bottle-neck.

          Ho

          • by ultranova (717540)

            Assembly optimization is the least of your SPU utilization problems. Just getting code and data to fit is.

            But isn't that where hand-optimized assembly really shines ? If you really only have 256kB of RAM, you'll want to forget procedural programming and go with goto's; by hard-coding each variable to a specific memory location can you utilize the tiny memory fully and be absolutely sure there won't be stack overflow.

            Each layer of abstraction adds at least a bit overhead, so if resources are tight, str

            • by drinkypoo (153816)

              Assembly optimization is the least of your SPU utilization problems. Just getting code and data to fit is.

              But isn't that where hand-optimized assembly really shines ?

              Yes, absolutely. Unfortunately hand-optimized code is the opposite of the direction in which programming is going, which is to say, with everything running in virtual machines.

              Even today, though, where operating systems and even some programs normally run on the bare metal, we don't typically write very much assembler. Since it is a

        • by Fordiman (689627)
          "Cell as implemented in the PS3 has 8 cells. One is disabled (probably due to poor yields when demanding that all 8 be working.) In Linux, one is devoted to kernel tasks. That leaves you with six Cell SPEs to work with besides the PPC PPE."

          Which makes you wonder why they didn't let Linux's SMP support take over the seven.
          • by drinkypoo (153816)

            Which makes you wonder why they didn't let Linux's SMP support take over the seven.

            No, it makes you wonder. I know it's for the following reasons:

            1. Cell SPEs do not have direct access to main memory. They have a 256kB memory space into which data and code must be inserted before anything can be done.
            2. Cell SPEs are not the same as the cell PPE. Symmetric Multitasking implies Symmetric CPUs. PPE is not symmetric to SPE.

            The Cells are entirely unsuited to general purpose computing. They are only really cap

      • by eno2001 (527078)
        Well... I saw a video on Youtube of a guy booting Fedora Core 6 on a PS3. When it booted, two big Tux penguins were displayed indicating dual CPUs. Then after a bit of booting six more smaller Tux penguins appeared beneath the first two. So I suspect all eight cores are in use.
    • Why support the Playstation? Because it's cool to be able to run linux on the Sony Playstation. Game consoles make great computers because typically the makers sell these things at a loss hoping to make money on the games. So you can get a computer at a lower price then you otherwise could. These new generation consoles are actually very powerfull computers and Linux lets you use them for non-gamming.like say a robot controller
    • by Fordiman (689627)
      Special drivers for PS3 hardware? If you don't need 'em, don't compile 'em. If you probably wont need 'em, compile 'em as modules.

      Cool thing about the Linux Kernel; it's got drivers for a whole RANGE of things you'll likely never use. But if you do, they're there.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 31, 2007 @11:49AM (#17828150)

    The Sony Playstation 3 support in the 2.6.20 kernel is coming because of Sony engineers contributing the patches, which add machine-specific support for various items.
    Great, so now Sony is starting to put their rootkit^H^H^H^H^H^H^Hcode into the Linux kernel now...
  • So wait.. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 31, 2007 @11:50AM (#17828154)
    All it takes to get a /. front page link to my ad-word laden website is to create a few bar graphs showing that nothing has changed in the last few kernel revisions and add 2 paragraphs of filler text?
    • Re: (Score:2, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward
      All it takes to get a /. front page link to my ad-word laden website is to create a few bar graphs showing that nothing has changed in the last few kernel revisions and add 2 paragraphs of filler text?


      You could also add some remarks about Vista and global climate change, but yeah - basically bar graphs should be enough. Or pie chart. If you really want to troll Slashdot, make them link to Power Point files.

      • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

        by Anpheus (908711)
        Powerpoint files accompanied by PDFs and a video requiring the latest release of Flash.
  • What the... (Score:5, Informative)

    by Jethro (14165) on Wednesday January 31, 2007 @11:51AM (#17828176) Homepage
    So the bottom line here is that they're almost exactly the same?
    • by Kadin2048 (468275) <slashdot DOT kadin AT xoxy DOT net> on Wednesday January 31, 2007 @11:55AM (#17828254) Homepage Journal
      So the bottom line here is that they're almost exactly the same?

      Yeah, that was a totally worthwhile read, no?

      Let me give everyone else the bottom line, and save you two or three minutes of your life, that you'll otherwise never get back:

      Sony Playstation 3 support and Kernel-based Virtual Machine support are among the exciting features in this release. From today's testing in our environment used and set of benchmarks, there were no definitive performance gains or losses seen throughout the set of tests.
      Now, back to our regularly scheduled Slashvertising....
    • Well, that's good. The whole point is that 2.16.20 adds features, and manages to do so at basically no cost. It would have been reasonable to expect such additions to inflict a minor speed penalty, but there was no penalty. This is a situation where nothing speaks far louder than something.
    • by joshetc (955226)
      Yeh I was a bit confused as to what they expected to change. Isn't that the reason its going from 2.6.19 to 2.6.20?

      Then again I'm sure they made some decent $ out of all the friendly visitors they have to their website now...
  • ThinkPad? (Score:5, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 31, 2007 @11:51AM (#17828180)
    Is this a joke?

    He's running kernel benchmarks on a laptop?

    Looks like half the things he was measuring were I/O bound? On a laptop?

    Phoronix.... more like Moronix.

    • by Zapman (2662)
      Yes, he was largely doing things that were IO bound, on a platform that's notorious for having bad IO performance (a laptop).

      But, there were some IO changes. I haven't run the numbers to see if they were statistically significant changes, but tests that show improvements in such a 'poor case' scenario are useful...
  • by victim (30647) on Wednesday January 31, 2007 @11:52AM (#17828204)
    I tried to read the article, but someone has vandalized it with double underlined words all over the place and annoying popups when your mouse slides over them. I closed the window.
    • by ajs318 (655362)
      What are you talking about? Looks fine in Konqueror, no popups or nothing. Just the crappy double-underlining thing.

      I'm also running through a Squid proxy that blocks all known advertising sites.
  • by Duncan3 (10537)
    Since the article doesn't have any content, I assume this was a badly disguised slashvertisement? None of those are even kernel benchmarks.

    Stop the bullshit ads or just shut /. down already. You're not even trying to compete with sites like Digg are you.
    • You're not even trying to compete with sites like Digg are you.

      No, I don't think they are. Should they be? Why?

  • Seems pretty pointless. It'd be more interesting if they threw a few NT kernels in there though...
  • Not the most scientific. At least give us a standard deviation or even a range of what the results are. There's a slight difference, but are they statistically significant? Can't tell with the data provided. And given how close the results are, I don't think it matters.
  • Bottom Line (Score:4, Interesting)

    by shirizaki (994008) on Wednesday January 31, 2007 @11:59AM (#17828302)
    With the Linux 2.6.19 kernel coming out last November and only two additional releases in the 2.6.19 branch, the Linux 2.6.20 kernel is certainly coming quickly. Linus Torvalds had mentioned in the 2.6.20-rc6 release announcement that this is likely the last release candidate. However, even with this quick kernel release coming the features are definitively impressive. Sony Playstation 3 support and Kernel-based Virtual Machine support are among the exciting features in this release. From today's testing in our environment used and set of benchmarks, there were no definitive performance gains or losses seen throughout the set of tests.

    It's nice to get features without sacrificing performance. The added PS3 support would nab those ubuntu people to put it on PS3. Not only that, but yellow dog might get some competition if some peoepl decide to make their own PS3-based distro with all kinds of extras.
  • not newsworthy (Score:4, Insightful)

    by sloth jr (88200) on Wednesday January 31, 2007 @12:13PM (#17828536)
    With a great article title like "Linux 2.6.20-rc6 Kernel Performance", I figured there must be something really notable about this release - and yet, there isn't. Summary: some things a neglible amount faster, some a negligible amount slower. If the "firehose" feature I've seen is anything like a preview of how submitted articles are reviewed for publication, I'd say an important part of this process would be at least a review of the linked content to determine whether or not it satisfies any reasonable criteria of newsworthiness.
    • by garcia (6573)
      Even if it did have content, I don't consider a Mobile processor a worthwhile CPU to benchmark anything against.
  • by amorsen (7485) <benny+slashdot@amorsen.dk> on Wednesday January 31, 2007 @12:44PM (#17828988)
    Kernel developers regularly hunt elusive speed boosts which can only be detected by specialized benchmark. 2% on something as generic as kernel compilation is fantastic.

    Of course the tests probably weren't conducted in a sufficiently scientific way, so the measurement error probably swamps the 2% improvement. If it can be independently repeated, congratulations are definitely in order!
  • yay, ps3 support! (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Lord Ender (156273) on Wednesday January 31, 2007 @01:07PM (#17829344) Homepage
    I can run it on a PS3, but I still can't run it on an Asus A8V motherboard, because there are no working drivers for the onboard SATA controller. Boo.
  • KVM support? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Vellmont (569020) on Wednesday January 31, 2007 @01:10PM (#17829382)
    Can the creators of this technology choose a better word for it? KVM is already widely known as a KVM switch, Keyboard, Video, Mouse. It lets you connect multiple computers to the same monitor,keyboard and mouse and switch between them.

    Choosing the same acronym for this new technology is only bound to cause confusion.
  • by xoundmind (932373) on Wednesday January 31, 2007 @01:11PM (#17829406)
    With that kind of performance increase, my Gentoo laptop is going to be screaming along after the release of 2.6.20.

    Ok...was that sarcastic enough? With this crowd, one can never quite know.
  • Gotta ask: will PS3 support in 2.6.20 allow me to turn a PS3 into a MythTV frontend?
  • by ZakuSage (874456) on Wednesday January 31, 2007 @02:02PM (#17830026)
    It's slightly faster.... TO THE MAX!
  • On 2.6.19-ck1, I ran into a number of show-stopping problems with I/O resulting in several severe hangs (which I never bothered to debug) which I have linked to I/O. I've been hearing reports from other users of the -ck patchset that they are experiencing similar problems with 2.6.20-rc5/6.

    I think I'll wait a bit and stick with 2.6.18 for now.

  • by ratboy666 (104074) <fred_weigel@hotmail . c om> on Wednesday January 31, 2007 @03:13PM (#17830978) Homepage Journal
    Given that the article, obstensibly about kernel performance, makes no effort to actually cover kernel performance...

    I was suckered in; it looked like a worthy topic. Now, I ask myself: Why did I bother?

"Regardless of the legal speed limit, your Buick must be operated at speeds faster than 85 MPH (140kph)." -- 1987 Buick Grand National owners manual.

Working...