Ok guys, here's that work I've been talking about:
"An analysis of three Linux kernel VM systems"
http://www.nks.net/linux-vm.html
Paul, of the most interest to you, the conclusion in a nutshell is that
yes, the 2.4 kernel VM systems still have a few quirks to work out, but
overall they are so significantly better than the 2.2 VM that there
really is no comparison.
However, this "significantly better" conclusion is for certain
high-stress situations where the 2.2 VM will fail entirely, while 2.4
chugs along with barely a notice.
For overall end-user experience, 2.2 still "feels" better overall with
better interactive responsiveness under a varying set of loads even
though 2.4 really is faster at doing the actual work.
BTW - Tina or Rob, I'd love to see this show up on Newsforge and/or
Slashdot. :) I'll be sending a note off to LKML about it as well.
--
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
#!/usr/bin/perl -w
$_='while(read+STDIN,$_,2048){$a=29;$b=73;$c=142;$t=255;@t=map
{$_%16or$t^=$c^=($m=(11,10,116,100,11,122,20,100)[$_/16%8])&110;
$t^=(72,@z=(64,72,$a^=12*($_%16-2?0:$m&17)),$b^=$_%64?12:0,@z)
[$_%8]}(16..271);if((@a=unx"C*",$_)[20]&48){$h=5;$_=unxb24,join
"",@b=map{xB8,unxb8,chr($_^$a[--$h+84])}@ARGV;s/...$/1$&/;$d=
unxV,xb25,$_;$e=256|(ord$b[4])<<9|ord$b[3];$d=$d>>8^($f=$t&($d
>>12^$d>>4^$d^$d/8))<<17,$e=$e>>8^($t&($g=($q=$e>>14&7^$e)^$q*
8^$q<<6))<<9,$_=$t[$_]^(($h>>=8)+=$f+(~$g&$t))for@a[128..$#a]}
print+x"C*",@a}';s/x/pack+/g;eval
usage: qrpff 153 2 8 105 225 < /mnt/dvd/VOB_FILENAME \
| extract_mpeg2 | mpeg2dec -
http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~dst/DeCSS/Gallery/
http://www.eff.org/ http://www.anti-dmca.org/
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/293/5537/2028
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Fri Aug 01 2014 - 16:29:59 EDT