Active Topics
-
Camera phone competition March 2023 "Endless" (35)
to General by Maemish - 1 day, 11 hrs ago -
TLS 1.2 for N9 is ready (28)
to MeeGo / Harmattan by smartblu9 - 1 day, 12 hrs ago -
Maemo repository (3)
to Community by torsen - 2 days, 4 hrs ago -
Error after installing Leste on sdcard (11)
to Maemo 7 / Leste by Maemish - 3 days, 1 hr ago -
Introducing ubiboot N9 (multiboot OS loader) (1,393)
to Alternatives by smatkovi - 4 days, 8 hrs ago - more...
 |
|
2008-08-15
, 20:33
|
|
Posts: 3,397 |
Thanked: 1,212 times |
Joined on Jul 2008
@ Netherlands
|
#12
|
Yes, I've used that trick before with proprietary kernel modules (IIRC NVidia kernel module didn't like the different name) while I didn't want to recompile it.
What uname returns isn't that important. It doesn't say much. For example, you could call your Linux kernel 2.6.30 if you really wanted to.
You can definetely check if PREEMPT (RT) is enabled:
This should return 1.
See this article for more in-depth details.
You can also do some benchmarks.
You can share how it 'feels'. This is also worth something. No NIT is the same, so if you'd share your build other people can test and/or benchmark as well.
Ironially I'm not sure what kind of kernel I'm running right now, but it made the NIT a lot more responsive... uname tells me no useful information though. Case in my point for my 2nd point in this post.
PREEMPT (RT) should work very well on the current NITs with OMAP2. Look here. It has been ported to Linux/ARM (OMAP) since 2005.
What uname returns isn't that important. It doesn't say much. For example, you could call your Linux kernel 2.6.30 if you really wanted to.
You can definetely check if PREEMPT (RT) is enabled:
Code:
# cat /proc/sys/kernel/kernel_preemption
See this article for more in-depth details.
You can also do some benchmarks.
You can share how it 'feels'. This is also worth something. No NIT is the same, so if you'd share your build other people can test and/or benchmark as well.
Ironially I'm not sure what kind of kernel I'm running right now, but it made the NIT a lot more responsive... uname tells me no useful information though. Case in my point for my 2nd point in this post.
PREEMPT (RT) should work very well on the current NITs with OMAP2. Look here. It has been ported to Linux/ARM (OMAP) since 2005.
__________________
Goosfraba! All text written by allnameswereout is public domain unless stated otherwise. Thank you for sharing your output!
Goosfraba! All text written by allnameswereout is public domain unless stated otherwise. Thank you for sharing your output!
 |
|
2008-08-16
, 06:12
|
|
Posts: 4,274 |
Thanked: 5,358 times |
Joined on Sep 2007
@ Looking at y'all and sighing
|
#13
|
Originally Posted by allnameswereout
We aren't using PREEMPT (RT) (which is enabled with CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT), we are just using plain PREEMPT (which is enabled with CONFIG_PREEMPT)
You can definetely check if PREEMPT (RT) is enabled:
This should return 1.Code:# cat /proc/sys/kernel/kernel_preemption
See this article for more in-depth details.
You can also do some benchmarks.
You can share how it 'feels'. This is also worth something. No NIT is the same, so if you'd share your build other people can test and/or benchmark as well.
PREEMPT (RT) should work very well on the current NITs with OMAP2. Look here. It has been ported to Linux/ARM (OMAP) since 2005.
/proc/sys/kernel/kernel_preemption does not exist on the nits when using preempt.
I thought it was my versioning that may have removed it but when I flashed a proper preempt kernel (with the uname showing it was preempt), that proc entry still wasn't there.
Anyway, here is my patch to enable PREEMPT and trick the versioning:
http://pastebin.com/ffc8f11b
EDIT: I'd try that CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT patch but it has disappeared off the internet
Last edited by qwerty12; 2008-08-16 at 09:05.
|
|
2008-08-16
, 12:13
|
|
Posts: 10 |
Thanked: 0 times |
Joined on May 2008
|
#14
|
What a great response! The mention of using preempt rt is particularly interesting. Is anyone one else interested / going to give it a try? Once i finish this paper im writing i will give it a go, just been swamped since i made the original post.
Craig
Craig
|
|
2008-08-16
, 14:42
|
|
Posts: 3,397 |
Thanked: 1,212 times |
Joined on Jul 2008
@ Netherlands
|
#15
|
Originally Posted by qwerty12
Hi qwerty12,
We aren't using PREEMPT (RT) (which is enabled with CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT), we are just using plain PREEMPT (which is enabled with CONFIG_PREEMPT)
/proc/sys/kernel/kernel_preemption does not exist on the nits when using preempt.
I thought it was my versioning that may have removed it but when I flashed a proper preempt kernel (with the uname showing it was preempt), that proc entry still wasn't there.
Anyway, here is my patch to enable PREEMPT and trick the versioning:
http://pastebin.com/ffc8f11b
EDIT: I'd try that CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT patch but it has disappeared off the internet
I believe the PREEMPT (RT) kernel is called linux-rt
The webpage is http://rt.wiki.kernel.org
The advantage of this kernel is that you can finetune the performance while it runs
__________________
Goosfraba! All text written by allnameswereout is public domain unless stated otherwise. Thank you for sharing your output!
Goosfraba! All text written by allnameswereout is public domain unless stated otherwise. Thank you for sharing your output!
| The Following User Says Thank You to allnameswereout For This Useful Post: | ||
|
|
2008-08-16
, 14:45
|
|
Posts: 3,397 |
Thanked: 1,212 times |
Joined on Jul 2008
@ Netherlands
|
#16
|
Originally Posted by Craig@dcs
Yes, I am, however I don't want to lose my current kernel (its fast
What a great response! The mention of using preempt rt is particularly interesting. Is anyone one else interested / going to give it a try? Once i finish this paper im writing i will give it a go, just been swamped since i made the original post.
Craig
) and don't know anymore which one it is. How can I find this out?Maybe a wiki page which contains all the kernel changes / options (with links) is a good idea?
I also don't have ScratchBox installed anymore. And because there is a new version in the making I am waiting for that. But I am also willing to try Mamona...
[edit]Nevermind, I think I'm using Fanoush his SDHC kernel. I used KVM to create a i386 VM, and installed SB2-beta on it... unfortunately maemo.research.nokia.com doesn't resolve...[/edit]
__________________
Goosfraba! All text written by allnameswereout is public domain unless stated otherwise. Thank you for sharing your output!
Goosfraba! All text written by allnameswereout is public domain unless stated otherwise. Thank you for sharing your output!
Last edited by allnameswereout; 2008-08-16 at 17:52.
Of course, I have no way of telling if it's preempt so feel free to treat this like BS
What I just said about the /proc thing wasn't true
Last edited by qwerty12; 2008-08-15 at 16:00.