Re: x86_64 ten times slower than i386

!MAILaRCHIVE_VOTE_RePLACE
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
To: Andi Kleen <andi@...>
Cc: Ray Lee <ray-lk@...>, Bo <bosse@...>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...>, <linux-kernel@...>
Date: Wednesday, November 7, 2007 - 2:38 pm

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, 8:26 pm)
Re: x86_64 ten times slower than i386, Jesse Barnes, (Wed Nov 7, 2:38 pm)
Re: x86_64 ten times slower than i386, H. Peter Anvin, (Mon Nov 5, 9:19 pm)
Re: x86_64 ten times slower than i386, Willy Tarreau, (Tue Nov 6, 3:40 pm)
Re: x86_64 ten times slower than i386, H. Peter Anvin, (Tue Nov 6, 3:50 pm)
Re: x86_64 ten times slower than i386, Willy Tarreau, (Tue Nov 6, 3:53 pm)