> That's all I'm saying. Essentially, I've tried to convince people with raw
> numbers that the VM layer doesn't actually need any major overhaul, it
> only needs to get the slight fixes. People that have talked about major
> overhauls haven't shown me either code _or_ reasoning, so..
Ok, we get the point. I've just had a thought - what if the problems we've
been seeing with the memory allocation/defragmentation issues are unique
to low memory machines? If that is the case, then maybe we should have a
_different_ algorithm for handling these low memory machines (use 2.0.x
algorithms?), and keep the existing one for boxes with plenty of memory.
I'm now finding that after about 7 days' of uptime, this Linux box [P75 +
16MB] actually gets slower than Win95. I'm not kidding. It's getting to
the point where I am contemplating dumping 2.1.x and going back to 2.0.35.
And that brings me to a nasty thought I've been having lately. What if we
have been infiltrated by covert Microsoft agents intent on sabotaging the
Linux project? I have seen the problems that you've had with the Linux
kernel by integrating bad source code that was given to you. [2.1.44 comes
to mind]
It pays to be paranoid. :o) That's why I'm still here and not in prison.
Just kiddin, but you know what I'm thinking, right, dude?
Cheers,
Alex.
--- /\_/\ Legalise cannabis now! ( o.o ) Smoke some cannabis today! > ^ < Peace, Love, Unity and Respect to all.Check out http://www.tahallah.demon.co.ukA
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.altern.org/andrebalsa/doc/lkml-faq.html