Hi, I'm also fight with the "load-avg" issue. I found some mails regarding this on the mailing list - here something from my side
about this...
On Tuesday 19 April 2005 Blaisorblade wrote:
> The patch I suggested to Chris was named, in the patch,
> "update-process-times", however the name in my tree was
> uml-timer-context.
> I've attached it.
>
> Chris Aker reported that in 2.6.10 it fixed the problem, but I didn't > verify
> (even because I simply knew that patch *had* to be applied to fix some
> problems, so I just asked it to check that it fixed also that
> problem). Also,
> this patch *has* been applied in 2.6.11; however, I'd still like a
> confirmation that it fixed the problem in 2.6.10.
I have the problem since 2.6.10 - 2.6.11.7 (tried today) without any changes. Today I tried 2.6.9.11 - it seems the patch was already applied on this version (without the "#ifdef CONFIG_SMP" arond but this one look strange inmy eyes but never mind...). Problem stays!!
I haven't proofed yet with real numbers but compared to 2.6.10 this kernel seems to be slower - can anyone confirm this?
Patrick
------------------------------------------------------- SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users. Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=6595&alloc_id=14396&op=click _______________________________________________ User-mode-linux-user mailing list User-mode-linux-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/user-mode-linux-user
