> At first I thought that the VM in 2.4.10-acX (I've tried ac3 and ac7) was
> a big improvement over vanilla 2.4.9 (my previous kernel). But after
> playing around with different versions and patches, and actually running
> the same kernel for a day or more I ran into severe problems.
I've already put out a patch which tries to fix this problem,
once we've established that it indeed works as advertised and
doesn't have bad side effects, I'll ask Alan to integrate it:
http://www.surriel.com/patches/2.4/2.4.10-ac9-eatcache
The patch applies cleanly to at least 2.4.10-ac9 and -ac10,
maybe a few others too.
It would be nice to know if this patch fixes the problems for
you, if it does there's another reason to ask Alan to integrate
it ... if it doesn't I'll try to make it work before sending
the thing to Alan.
regards,
Rik
-- DMCA, SSSCA, W3C? Who cares? http://thefreeworld.net/ (volunteers needed)http://www.surriel.com/ http://distro.conectiva.com/
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/