On Mon, 2019-04-15 at 14:42 +0500, Alexander V. Makartsev wrote: > A quick glance at tests [1] makes me not bother with Liquorix yet. > As you can see, performance is a double edged sword, you gain a little more > responsiveness, but loose on throughput. > Of course it should be tested for your workload and probably also perform a > security audit check of all modifications in Liquorix.
Thanks for the input. To be honest, I'm ok with that trade-off; my
intention is to boot Liquorix for gaming only. For regular workloads I'd stick
with the vanilla kernel.
Also, I'm sorry for the noobish question, but it's been a really long
time since I've done any kind of kernel work. How do I perform a security check?
> [1]
> https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=Liquorix-Linux-4.17-Kernel
Thanks again.
Cheers,
Francisco
--
[]'s,
Francisco M Neto
GPG: 4096R/D692FBF0
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
