Overclock.net › Forums › Software, Programming and Coding › Operating Systems › Linux, Unix › Just built vanilla Arch kernel...
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Just built vanilla Arch kernel... - Page 5

post #41 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by adamlau View Post
@nathris: I had been using my old .config since early 2.6 and just got the kernel image down to 1784848K. Thanks for the inspiration!

@mushroomboy: How is 2.6.37 BFS/BFQ working out for you? 2.6.37 BFS has been running fine for the past few days, it's when BFQ has been patched in (CFQ removed) alongside BFS that things turn ever so slightly sluggish...
I'm running both patches, optimized for K8/10 and a few other tweaks no problems. I've actually noticed no sluggish response times. I'm also now officially running Debian Sid again, so things are a little different. I'm slightly behind something like Arch, but I think the benefits are far greater. I don't care any more to be the physical maintainer, I know this system extremely well and if I need to tweak it I can. What I like is the fact that it's been extremely more responsive than Arch was. Take Urt for example, the ioq3-urt 64bit executable is very sluggish in Arch but I get full FPS in Debian. Idk why, don't care, I just know that things run much smoother.
Current Rig
(14 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
FX-8350 4.6GHz@1.44v GA-990FXA-UD3 R4.0 HD 7950 (1100/1450) 8G Muskin DDR3 1866@8CLS 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
1TB WD LiteOn DVD-RW DL Linux/Windows 19" Phillips TV 1080p 
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
OCZ 600W Generic Junk Logitech MX400 Generic Junk 
Audio
SBL 5.1 
  hide details  
Reply
Current Rig
(14 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
FX-8350 4.6GHz@1.44v GA-990FXA-UD3 R4.0 HD 7950 (1100/1450) 8G Muskin DDR3 1866@8CLS 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
1TB WD LiteOn DVD-RW DL Linux/Windows 19" Phillips TV 1080p 
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
OCZ 600W Generic Junk Logitech MX400 Generic Junk 
Audio
SBL 5.1 
  hide details  
Reply
post #42 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by enorbet2 View Post
Of course I know that but that is just the default setting. I know and apparently you do too, that a vanilla kernel comes untainted from kernel.org. There are many who will read this thread who are so tied into repositories, that will assume that the latest kernel update for their distro is "vanilla" if they just leave it alone.

Ubuntu and it's like remind me of a time when there were millions of people who actually believed that AOL was the Internet.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mushroomboy View Post
I'm running both patches, optimized for K8/10 and a few other tweaks no problems. I've actually noticed no sluggish response times. I'm also now officially running Debian Sid again, so things are a little different. I'm slightly behind something like Arch, but I think the benefits are far greater. I don't care any more to be the physical maintainer, I know this system extremely well and if I need to tweak it I can. What I like is the fact that it's been extremely more responsive than Arch was. Take Urt for example, the ioq3-urt 64bit executable is very sluggish in Arch but I get full FPS in Debian. Idk why, don't care, I just know that things run much smoother.
sup guys, thought i drop in and say hi, been awhile

i'm still using ubuntu, just recently went to 10.10 (never did figure out my problem with the random freezing in 10.04, 10.10 doesn't seem to have that problem.)

i've used vanilla kernels before in both arch and ubuntu, i can honestly say from my experience, ubuntu is definately not meant to have a vanilla kernel at its heart, and arch isn't as vanilla as the maintainers say it is.

there is a lot of hassle in compiling ones own kernel for their chosen distro, the only one i do it for now is the slackware server i have (which btw has been running 6 months straight without any problems or reboots, which i'm mighty happy about.)

as i honestly have no need to compile my own kernel, as the gains for it are minimal at best, going thru the process of doing it the "debian" way for Ubuntu is painful and totally not worth it, as the community produces some very nice kernels that are available in the repo's.

i'm glad that a vanilla kernel is working for you without problem nathris, as the problems were sublte, and i wrote most of them off as "buggy" software made available in the aur.

just as a side note, i've found it a lot more benificial in compiling the big programs you use mainly to be more of a benefit than compiling your own kernel. i still compile about 50% of the programs i use for ubuntu on my own, and i've gotten speed increase of about 30% to 50% from doing this by stripping out all the trash and setting my own compile flags for the programs.

its great and all to shave off 10 seconds or whatever it was from the boot time, but i'd rather have the faster daily used programs

enjoy..
Bazinga Punk
(12 items)
 
ooh shiny!
(6 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Xeon 3440 AsRock P55 extreme Evga 8800 GT 512 MB Gskill Ripjaws 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
Western Digital Blue Antec Khuler 620 Ubuntu 11.10 Asus vw264H 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
GIGABYTE KM7600 CORSAIR TX 650 Cooler Master 590 GIGABYTE GM-M6800 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core I5 6500 Gigabyte z170xp-SLI Nvidia 970gtx Corsair 16gb ddr4 2666mhz  
Hard DriveOS
250gb Samsung Evo 850 Windows 10 & Ubuntu 15.10 
  hide details  
Reply
Bazinga Punk
(12 items)
 
ooh shiny!
(6 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Xeon 3440 AsRock P55 extreme Evga 8800 GT 512 MB Gskill Ripjaws 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
Western Digital Blue Antec Khuler 620 Ubuntu 11.10 Asus vw264H 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
GIGABYTE KM7600 CORSAIR TX 650 Cooler Master 590 GIGABYTE GM-M6800 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core I5 6500 Gigabyte z170xp-SLI Nvidia 970gtx Corsair 16gb ddr4 2666mhz  
Hard DriveOS
250gb Samsung Evo 850 Windows 10 & Ubuntu 15.10 
  hide details  
Reply
post #43 of 46
Yo all I did for debian for compiling the kernel was:

make gconfig (loaded my own custom config)
make-kpkg clean (precaution)
CONCURRENCY_LEVEL=4 fakeroot make-kpkg --initrd kernel_image kernel_headers

That's just about it, I don't see how the Debian/Ubuntu way is that painful. Heck, you can still do it the oldschool way too, it just doesn't give you deb packages and points /usr/src/linux back to the build directory. Oddly I created headers and it still did it, I havent fixed it yet though. =P

[edit] Oh and on a quad-core with 2G ram it took me like 5 min to compile the kernel, almost no time what so ever.
Current Rig
(14 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
FX-8350 4.6GHz@1.44v GA-990FXA-UD3 R4.0 HD 7950 (1100/1450) 8G Muskin DDR3 1866@8CLS 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
1TB WD LiteOn DVD-RW DL Linux/Windows 19" Phillips TV 1080p 
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
OCZ 600W Generic Junk Logitech MX400 Generic Junk 
Audio
SBL 5.1 
  hide details  
Reply
Current Rig
(14 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
FX-8350 4.6GHz@1.44v GA-990FXA-UD3 R4.0 HD 7950 (1100/1450) 8G Muskin DDR3 1866@8CLS 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
1TB WD LiteOn DVD-RW DL Linux/Windows 19" Phillips TV 1080p 
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
OCZ 600W Generic Junk Logitech MX400 Generic Junk 
Audio
SBL 5.1 
  hide details  
Reply
post #44 of 46
The kernel really doesn't take all that much time to compile, especially if it's not an Ubuntu kernel. Software like Firefox takes much longer. I'm not sure if this is just due to the nature of the kernel source, but I've found that regardless of what value I set CONCURRENCY_LEVEL to it doesn't seem to efficiently split the load. Most of the time my CPU usage hovers around 80% on all threads. In contrast, using make -jX loads up the CPU to around 100% constantly, although I haven't done it with a kernel yet to compare apples to apples.
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 920 D0 MSI X58 Pro-E GTX 560 Ti 448 3x2GB G.Skill DDR3-1333 9-9-9-24 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveOS
840 Pro Caviar Black LG BD-ROM Windows 8.1 Pro x64 
MonitorMonitorKeyboardPower
Dell U2713HM Dell U2311H Turbo-Trak (Google it :D) Corsair HX-520 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
CM690 Mionix Avior 7000 Everglide Titan AKG K 242 HD 
  hide details  
Reply
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 920 D0 MSI X58 Pro-E GTX 560 Ti 448 3x2GB G.Skill DDR3-1333 9-9-9-24 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveOS
840 Pro Caviar Black LG BD-ROM Windows 8.1 Pro x64 
MonitorMonitorKeyboardPower
Dell U2713HM Dell U2311H Turbo-Trak (Google it :D) Corsair HX-520 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
CM690 Mionix Avior 7000 Everglide Titan AKG K 242 HD 
  hide details  
Reply
post #45 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by randomizer View Post
The kernel really doesn't take all that much time to compile, especially if it's not an Ubuntu kernel. Software like Firefox takes much longer. I'm not sure if this is just due to the nature of the kernel source, but I've found that regardless of what value I set CONCURRENCY_LEVEL to it doesn't seem to efficiently split the load. Most of the time my CPU usage hovers around 80% on all threads. In contrast, using make -jX loads up the CPU to around 100% constantly, although I haven't done it with a kernel yet to compare apples to apples.
I dunno, works for me! lol I've also read that -j0 doesn't work well on kernel compiles. I dunno, concurrency_level works fine so I don't question things. If I do it that way I get all 4 cores on full load and a kernel in about 5 min.
Current Rig
(14 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
FX-8350 4.6GHz@1.44v GA-990FXA-UD3 R4.0 HD 7950 (1100/1450) 8G Muskin DDR3 1866@8CLS 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
1TB WD LiteOn DVD-RW DL Linux/Windows 19" Phillips TV 1080p 
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
OCZ 600W Generic Junk Logitech MX400 Generic Junk 
Audio
SBL 5.1 
  hide details  
Reply
Current Rig
(14 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
FX-8350 4.6GHz@1.44v GA-990FXA-UD3 R4.0 HD 7950 (1100/1450) 8G Muskin DDR3 1866@8CLS 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
1TB WD LiteOn DVD-RW DL Linux/Windows 19" Phillips TV 1080p 
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
OCZ 600W Generic Junk Logitech MX400 Generic Junk 
Audio
SBL 5.1 
  hide details  
Reply
post #46 of 46
Perhaps the "issue" is only exposed with SMT. I haven't thought of trying it with Hyperthreading disabled.
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 920 D0 MSI X58 Pro-E GTX 560 Ti 448 3x2GB G.Skill DDR3-1333 9-9-9-24 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveOS
840 Pro Caviar Black LG BD-ROM Windows 8.1 Pro x64 
MonitorMonitorKeyboardPower
Dell U2713HM Dell U2311H Turbo-Trak (Google it :D) Corsair HX-520 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
CM690 Mionix Avior 7000 Everglide Titan AKG K 242 HD 
  hide details  
Reply
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 920 D0 MSI X58 Pro-E GTX 560 Ti 448 3x2GB G.Skill DDR3-1333 9-9-9-24 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveOS
840 Pro Caviar Black LG BD-ROM Windows 8.1 Pro x64 
MonitorMonitorKeyboardPower
Dell U2713HM Dell U2311H Turbo-Trak (Google it :D) Corsair HX-520 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
CM690 Mionix Avior 7000 Everglide Titan AKG K 242 HD 
  hide details  
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Linux, Unix
Overclock.net › Forums › Software, Programming and Coding › Operating Systems › Linux, Unix › Just built vanilla Arch kernel...