Re: x86_64 ten times slower than i386

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
From: Jesse Barnes
Date: Wednesday, November 7, 2007 - 11:38 am

On Monday, November 05, 2007 4:26 Andi Kleen wrote:

Andi, do you have any details on which system broke and how?  I haven't 
heard back from you on my last message on the subject... the patch was 
in -mm for awhile with no complaints.

Ultimately, this is a broken BIOS issue, but still, it would be nice if 
the kernel handled it better.

Thanks,
Jesse
-
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
Re: x86_64 ten times slower than i386, Andi Kleen, (Mon Nov 5, 5:26 pm)
Re: x86_64 ten times slower than i386, H. Peter Anvin, (Mon Nov 5, 6:19 pm)
Re: x86_64 ten times slower than i386, Willy Tarreau, (Tue Nov 6, 12:40 pm)
Re: x86_64 ten times slower than i386, H. Peter Anvin, (Tue Nov 6, 12:50 pm)
Re: x86_64 ten times slower than i386, Willy Tarreau, (Tue Nov 6, 12:53 pm)
Re: x86_64 ten times slower than i386, Jesse Barnes, (Wed Nov 7, 11:38 am)