Watch out for 10.3 kernel (slow) - Suse

This is a discussion on Watch out for 10.3 kernel (slow) - Suse ; (Don't know about previous releases) Why do they ship a kernel compiled with lots of debug symbols and not optimized? Default gcc flag in config file is -Os! (better be -O2) After careful recompilation the distro really rocks, but default ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 27

Thread: Watch out for 10.3 kernel (slow)

  1. Watch out for 10.3 kernel (slow)

    (Don't know about previous releases)

    Why do they ship a kernel compiled with lots of debug symbols and not
    optimized?
    Default gcc flag in config file is -Os! (better be -O2)
    After careful recompilation the distro really rocks, but default kernel is a
    shame.

    pedlo



  2. Re: Watch out for 10.3 kernel (slow)

    On Sat, 03 Nov 2007 12:27:25 +0000, pedlo wrote:

    > (Don't know about previous releases)
    >
    > Why do they ship a kernel compiled with lots of debug symbols and not
    > optimized?
    > Default gcc flag in config file is -Os! (better be -O2) After careful
    > recompilation the distro really rocks, but default kernel is a shame.
    >
    > pedlo


    Must be your system. Works well for me.



    --
    Neil
    reverse ra and delete l

  3. Re: Watch out for 10.3 kernel (slow)

    Then you may want to try to recompile the kernel...

    Instructions are in /usr/src/linux/readme.suse

    "Neil Ellwood" ha scritto nel messaggio
    news:OZ-dnb0brMAjNbHanZ2dnUVZ8s_inZ2d@bt.com...
    > On Sat, 03 Nov 2007 12:27:25 +0000, pedlo wrote:
    >
    >> (Don't know about previous releases)
    >>
    >> Why do they ship a kernel compiled with lots of debug symbols and not
    >> optimized?
    >> Default gcc flag in config file is -Os! (better be -O2) After careful
    >> recompilation the distro really rocks, but default kernel is a shame.
    >>
    >> pedlo

    >
    > Must be your system. Works well for me.
    >
    >
    >
    > --
    > Neil
    > reverse ra and delete l




  4. Re: Watch out for 10.3 kernel (slow)

    pedlo wrote:
    > Then you may want to try to recompile the kernel...
    >
    > Instructions are in /usr/src/linux/readme.suse
    >
    > "Neil Ellwood" ha scritto nel messaggio
    > news:OZ-dnb0brMAjNbHanZ2dnUVZ8s_inZ2d@bt.com...
    >> On Sat, 03 Nov 2007 12:27:25 +0000, pedlo wrote:
    >>
    >>> (Don't know about previous releases)
    >>>
    >>> Why do they ship a kernel compiled with lots of debug symbols and not
    >>> optimized?
    >>> Default gcc flag in config file is -Os! (better be -O2) After careful
    >>> recompilation the distro really rocks, but default kernel is a shame.
    >>>
    >>> pedlo

    >>
    >> Must be your system. Works well for me.


    If it ain't broke, don't fix it. That goes for both the kernel and the
    way people post in this group.

    houghi
    --



    This space left blank intentionaly

  5. Re: Watch out for 10.3 kernel (slow)

    > If it ain't broke, don't fix it. That goes for both the kernel and the
    > way people post in this group.
    >
    > houghi
    > --


    You're absolutely right.
    But please, let's do something to stop people say "Suse is slow and heavy".
    I totally disagree in running a Ferrari with half cylinders disabled, I hope
    you understand.

    pedlo



  6. Re: Watch out for 10.3 kernel (slow)

    pedlo wrote:
    >> If it ain't broke, don't fix it. That goes for both the kernel and the
    >> way people post in this group.
    >>
    >> houghi
    >> --

    >
    > You're absolutely right.
    > But please, let's do something to stop people say "Suse is slow and heavy".
    > I totally disagree in running a Ferrari with half cylinders disabled, I hope
    > you understand.


    Well, then stop saying it. First of all, I have NEVER been able to
    compile my own kernel, so that would mean that if I tried, I would not
    be able to run anything.
    Secondly, there is a reason that it is compiled the way it is.
    Thirdly, if you believe you can do better, please go to the factory
    mailinglist and solve the problem for 11.0
    Also you make it sound as if openSUSE developers do not care and that is
    not true, as you would know if you would frequent the factory
    mailinglist.

    If it is broke, fix it and fixing is not done here. It needs to be done
    before it gets out.

    houghi
    --



    This space left blank intentionaly

  7. Re: Watch out for 10.3 kernel (slow)

    > Well, then stop saying it.
    No way, I have the right to speak and I'm not spamming.

    >First of all, I have NEVER been able to
    > compile my own kernel, so that would mean that if I tried, I would not
    > be able to run anything.

    No need to comment this.
    Compiling in Suse is more or less 5 easy steps.

    > Secondly, there is a reason that it is compiled the way it is.

    I'd like to know it.

    > Thirdly, if you believe you can do better, please go to the factory
    > mailinglist and solve the problem for 11.0

    Maybe one day.

    > Also you make it sound as if openSUSE developers do not care and that is
    > not true, as you would know if you would frequent the factory
    > mailinglist.

    I'm NOT saying developers don't care! geeez...
    But if you have a reason for that kind of compilation, I honestly would like
    to know it. My observation came from a direct comparison between Mandriva's
    kernel and OpenSuse 10.3, and they are extremely different in terms of
    speed.
    That's it.

    > If it is broke, fix it and fixing is not done here. It needs to be done
    > before it gets out.

    Well, i ADJUSTED it, and I thought people should share improvements.

    > houghi

    pedlo



  8. Re: Watch out for 10.3 kernel (slow)

    pedlo wrote:
    >> Well, then stop saying it.

    > No way, I have the right to speak and I'm not spamming.


    Sure you do, yet somebody said we must be stop saying it.

    >>First of all, I have NEVER been able to
    >> compile my own kernel, so that would mean that if I tried, I would not
    >> be able to run anything.

    > No need to comment this.
    > Compiling in Suse is more or less 5 easy steps.


    That might well be for you. I was never able to do it.

    >> Secondly, there is a reason that it is compiled the way it is.

    > I'd like to know it.


    That has been and can be discussed best on the factory mailinglist where
    the developers are.

    >> Thirdly, if you believe you can do better, please go to the factory
    >> mailinglist and solve the problem for 11.0

    > Maybe one day.


    Why not now? It is also the place where you can find out the reason why
    it is compiled that way.

    >> Also you make it sound as if openSUSE developers do not care and that is
    >> not true, as you would know if you would frequent the factory
    >> mailinglist.

    > I'm NOT saying developers don't care! geeez...


    I am NOT saying that you did. I said it sounded as if you did.

    > But if you have a reason for that kind of compilation, I honestly would like
    > to know it. My observation came from a direct comparison between Mandriva's
    > kernel and OpenSuse 10.3, and they are extremely different in terms of
    > speed.
    > That's it.


    That answer can be found and given on the factory mailinglist.

    >> If it is broke, fix it and fixing is not done here. It needs to be done
    >> before it gets out.

    > Well, i ADJUSTED it, and I thought people should share improvements.


    I agree. However I have not seen your improvement. Also the best place
    for such an improvement is on the factory mailinglist where it will
    benefit the much more people.

    houghi
    --
    At the source of every error which is blamed on the computer you will
    find at least two human errors, including the error of blaming it on
    the computer.

  9. Re: Watch out for 10.3 kernel (slow)

    houghi wrote:
    >>> First of all, I have NEVER been able to
    >>> compile my own kernel, so that would mean that if I tried, I would not
    >>> be able to run anything.

    >> No need to comment this.
    >> Compiling in Suse is more or less 5 easy steps.

    >
    > That might well be for you. I was never able to do it.


    Then you're missing one of the good things in Linux. It's so easy to it
    in openSUSE. You only need the kernel source, ncurses-devel package and
    gcc installed:

    cd /usr/src/linux
    make cloneconfig
    make menuconfig

    Disable "General Setup-->Optimize for size"
    Choose your CPU in "Processor type and features-->Processor family"
    Select 1000Hz in "Processor type and features-->Timer frequency"
    Disable squashfs in "Filesystems-->Miscellaneous filesystems-->squashfs"
    (Because that one won't compile due to a bug, but you don't need that
    filesystem anyway.)

    After then, exit, confirm with "yes" in order to save the configuration,
    and then do:

    make (this will take quite some time; go eat dinner)
    make modules_install
    make install

    Reboot. Finished. Enjoy a more responsive system due do openSUSE using
    laggy and non-responsive settings as defaults.

    One thing I disagree with you is that even though you don't know how to
    build a kernel you still claim that there's not much difference between
    the RECOMMENDED optimization settings of the vanilla kernel and the
    choices of openSUSE. Simply go ahead and do what I described above and
    judge for yourself.

  10. Re: Watch out for 10.3 kernel (slow)

    pedlo wrote:
    >> Well, then stop saying it.

    >No way, I have the right to speak and I'm not spamming.


    >>First of all, I have NEVER been able to
    >> compile my own kernel, so that would mean that if I tried, I would not
    >> be able to run anything.

    >No need to comment this.
    >Compiling in Suse is more or less 5 easy steps.


    >> Secondly, there is a reason that it is compiled the way it is.

    >I'd like to know it.


    >> Thirdly, if you believe you can do better, please go to the factory
    >> mailinglist and solve the problem for 11.0

    >Maybe one day.


    >> Also you make it sound as if openSUSE developers do not care and that is
    >> not true, as you would know if you would frequent the factory
    >> mailinglist.

    >I'm NOT saying developers don't care! geeez...
    >But if you have a reason for that kind of compilation, I honestly would like
    >to know it. My observation came from a direct comparison between Mandriva's
    >kernel and OpenSuse 10.3, and they are extremely different in terms of
    >speed.
    >That's it.


    >> If it is broke, fix it and fixing is not done here. It needs to be done
    >> before it gets out.

    >Well, i ADJUSTED it, and I thought people should share improvements.


    >> houghi

    >pedlo


    The default kernel has all sorts of stuff in it to fit
    the hardware that it might run into. By compiling your
    own you can make the OS both smaller and faster.

    For most of us, it doesn't matter enough to take the time
    to do it.

    --
    --- Paul J. Gans

  11. Re: Watch out for 10.3 kernel (slow)

    Nikos Chantziaras wrote:
    > Reboot. Finished. Enjoy a more responsive system due do openSUSE using
    > laggy and non-responsive settings as defaults.


    I never experienced amy leggy and non-responsiveness. I will try this
    evening when I am home.

    In your explanation, I missed the part of backing up the current
    situation, so that I can go back to what I have. I will figure that out
    first before I go ahead.

    > One thing I disagree with you is that even though you don't know how to
    > build a kernel you still claim that there's not much difference between
    > the RECOMMENDED optimization settings of the vanilla kernel and the
    > choices of openSUSE. Simply go ahead and do what I described above and
    > judge for yourself.


    Uhm, I did not claim such a thing. I claim there is a reason that they
    do it the way they do it. I also claim that I never experienced any
    problems. Yes, I have seen machines boot faster then what I have now. To
    me that is a non-issue. The working of the system is almost the same
    with e.g. openSUSE or DSL.

    To me the speedlimitations I notice are PEBCAK.

    houghi
    --
    Listen do you hear them drawing near in their search for the sinners?
    Feeding on the power of our fear and the evil within us.
    Incarnation of Satan's creation of all that we dread.
    When the demons arrive those alive would be better off dead!

  12. Re: Watch out for 10.3 kernel (slow)

    Paul J Gans wrote:
    > The default kernel has all sorts of stuff in it to fit
    > the hardware that it might run into. By compiling your
    > own you can make the OS both smaller and faster.
    >
    > For most of us, it doesn't matter enough to take the time
    > to do it.


    My thoughts exactly. The fact that you can does not mean that you must.

    houghi
    --
    Listen do you hear them drawing near in their search for the sinners?
    Feeding on the power of our fear and the evil within us.
    Incarnation of Satan's creation of all that we dread.
    When the demons arrive those alive would be better off dead!

  13. Re: Watch out for 10.3 kernel (slow)

    Nikos Chantziaras wrote:


    It's so easy to it
    > in openSUSE.


    I wanted to try.

    You only need the kernel source, ncurses-devel package and
    > gcc installed:


    I have those.

    >
    > cd /usr/src/linux
    > make cloneconfig


    This is fine, no errors.

    > make menuconfig


    # make manuconfig
    make[1]: *** No rule to make target `manuconfig'. Stop.
    make: *** [manuconfig] Error 2

    Something missing there?

    Vahis
    --
    "Only wimps use tape backup: _real_ men just upload their important
    stuff on ftp, and let the rest of the world mirror it "
    Linus Torvalds 1996.

  14. Re: Watch out for 10.3 kernel (slow)

    Paul Stynen wrote:
    > Vahis wrote:
    >> This is fine, no errors.
    >>
    >>> make menuconfig

    >>
    >> # make manuconfig
    >> make[1]: *** No rule to make target `manuconfig'. Stop.
    >> make: *** [manuconfig] Error 2
    >>
    >> Something missing there?

    >
    > Yes some glasses
    > must be 'menuconfig' instead of 'manuconfig'
    >
    > Paul.


    Actually my wife did show me an ad this morning where two pairs of
    glasses were offered for the price of one. I wonder why...

    Thanks

    --
    "Only wimps use tape backup: _real_ men just upload their important
    stuff on ftp, and let the rest of the world mirror it "
    Linus Torvalds 1996.

  15. Re: Watch out for 10.3 kernel (slow)

    houghi wrote:
    > Nikos Chantziaras wrote:
    >> Reboot. Finished. Enjoy a more responsive system due do openSUSE using
    >> laggy and non-responsive settings as defaults.

    >
    > I never experienced amy leggy and non-responsiveness. I will try this
    > evening when I am home.
    >
    > In your explanation, I missed the part of backing up the current
    > situation, so that I can go back to what I have. I will figure that out
    > first before I go ahead.


    Sorry for that. Before you start, you can backup your current kernel
    modules with (you don't have to be root for that):

    cd /lib
    tar -cf /home/houghi/modules-backup.tar ./modules

    Or you can use your favorite GUI to backup /lib/modules.

    *After* the build and installation of the kernel, you will find some
    files with the "*.old" extension under /boot (the openSUSE "make
    install" installation backs-up the old kernel automatically). Simply:

    cp /boot/*.old /home/houghi

    (Or simply with your GUI file manager.)

    before you reboot. If you wish to revert after the new kernel, you
    restore everything back (you need to be root). The modules with:

    cd /lib
    tar -xf /home/houghi/modules-backup.tar

    and the kernel itself by removing the *.old extension from the backed-up
    files in /boot and moving them to /boot overwriting what's there.

    If you can't boot from hard disk in order to restore the kernel, simply
    boot the system from CD/DVD. I've done so countless times.


    >> One thing I disagree with you is that even though you don't know how to
    >> build a kernel you still claim that there's not much difference between
    >> the RECOMMENDED optimization settings of the vanilla kernel and the
    >> choices of openSUSE. Simply go ahead and do what I described above and
    >> judge for yourself.

    >
    > Uhm, I did not claim such a thing. I claim there is a reason that they
    > do it the way they do it.


    Yes, there are reasons. The user shouldn't be concerned too much about
    the reasons openSUSE has to offer a slow kernel though. One of the
    reasons for the slow kernel is of course that the user can build a fast
    kernel if he wants to. Hey, this is Linux, don't forget that

    There is a drawback to a self-built kernel though. When a new kernel
    update is issued by openSUSE, you will have to do a full download of the
    new kernel rather than simply getting the delta-RPMs which of course
    needs more time (depending on your internet connection's speed).


    > I also claim that I never experienced any
    > problems. Yes, I have seen machines boot faster then what I have now. To
    > me that is a non-issue. The working of the system is almost the same
    > with e.g. openSUSE or DSL.
    >
    > To me the speedlimitations I notice are PEBCAK.


    Maybe it depends on how you use your system. Games and multimedia?
    Just web and office? But don't forget; we're talking about GCC's -Os vs
    -O2 here! The speed difference *is* there, and there's a reason why the
    vanilla kernel uses -O2 (if you read the description in the kernel
    config dialog, it says right there that -Os is slow and only useful for
    distribution kernels where size if more important than speed).

    And besides, using Linux without ever having build the kernel by
    yourself is lame

  16. Re: Watch out for 10.3 kernel (slow)

    On Mon, 05 Nov 2007 23:16:39 +0200, Nikos Chantziaras wrote:

    >Then you're missing one of the good things in Linux. It's so easy to it
    >in openSUSE. You only need the kernel source, ncurses-devel package and
    >gcc installed:
    >
    > cd /usr/src/linux
    > make cloneconfig
    > make menuconfig
    >
    >Disable "General Setup-->Optimize for size"
    >Choose your CPU in "Processor type and features-->Processor family"
    >Select 1000Hz in "Processor type and features-->Timer frequency"
    >Disable squashfs in "Filesystems-->Miscellaneous filesystems-->squashfs"
    >(Because that one won't compile due to a bug, but you don't need that
    >filesystem anyway.)
    >
    >After then, exit, confirm with "yes" in order to save the configuration,
    >and then do:
    >
    > make (this will take quite some time; go eat dinner)
    > make modules_install
    > make install
    >
    >Reboot. Finished. Enjoy a more responsive system due do openSUSE using
    >laggy and non-responsive settings as defaults.
    >


    And how could I create a custom rpm package of this shiny new kernel?
    Since I have to maintain 5 machines it would be a pain to compile it 5 times.
    Can you help me there compatriot?


  17. Re: Watch out for 10.3 kernel (slow)

    Christos Gourdoupis wrote:
    > On Mon, 05 Nov 2007 23:16:39 +0200, Nikos Chantziaras wrote:
    >
    >> Then you're missing one of the good things in Linux. It's so easy to it
    >> in openSUSE. You only need the kernel source, ncurses-devel package and
    >> gcc installed:
    >>
    >> cd /usr/src/linux
    >> make cloneconfig
    >> make menuconfig
    >> [...]

    >
    > And how could I create a custom rpm package of this shiny new kernel?
    > Since I have to maintain 5 machines it would be a pain to compile it 5 times.
    > Can you help me there compatriot?


    There is a "make rpm" target, but I think it won't help produce an
    openSUSE RPM, since "rpm" is a target of the vanilla kernel and I don't
    see any openSUSE modifications in it. I could be wrong though.

    One thing you can try is doing a "make" and then

    cd /usr/src
    tar -cf /mnt/somenetworkshare/linux.tar ./linux

    Then, after installing the kernel source RPM on the target machine:

    cd /usr/src
    tar -xf /mnt/somenetworkshare/linux.tar
    cd linux
    make install_modules
    make install

    (on the target machine)

    The plan is that the kernel has to be built on one machine, and then
    installed on multiple ones by copying the whole build tree. tar ensures
    that file access times won't change, otherwise "make" would recompile
    everything and that's what we're trying to avoid.

    Btw, this assumes that all machines use the same type of CPU (all of
    them P4, all of them Core 2, etc.) If not, you will have to configure
    the kernel for a "generic" CPU, or take the time and compile the kernel
    on each machine individually.

  18. Re: Watch out for 10.3 kernel (slow)

    houghi wrote:
    > Paul J Gans wrote:
    >> The default kernel has all sorts of stuff in it to fit
    >> the hardware that it might run into. By compiling your
    >> own you can make the OS both smaller and faster.
    >>
    >> For most of us, it doesn't matter enough to take the time
    >> to do it.

    >
    > My thoughts exactly. The fact that you can does not mean that you must.
    >
    > houghi


    I did this and now I'm running the new compiled kernel.

    It took two hours to compile.
    There were a few warnings, so I was scared it won't boot.
    It booted fine but I haven't seen any difference in anything.

    I wonder what will happen the next time there is a kernel patch available.

    Vahis
    --
    "Only wimps use tape backup: _real_ men just upload their important
    stuff on ftp, and let the rest of the world mirror it "
    Linus Torvalds 1996.

  19. Re: Watch out for 10.3 kernel (slow)

    Nikos Chantziaras wrote:


    When I see al that, those are basicaly all bash commands. So it should
    be trivaial to put them in a script, put that online and tell everybody
    to run that.

    > If you can't boot from hard disk in order to restore the kernel, simply
    > boot the system from CD/DVD. I've done so countless times.


    The fact that you have rebooted from CD/DVD countless times tells me
    that compiling a kernel is not that trivial. Perhaps you should have a
    fallback in your grub. e.g. when a kernel does not come up, it falls
    back on the default.

    > Yes, there are reasons. The user shouldn't be concerned too much about
    > the reasons openSUSE has to offer a slow kernel though.


    I know, that is why I keep pointing to the factory mailinglist. ;-)

    > And besides, using Linux without ever having build the kernel by
    > yourself is lame


    Oh, I have build kernels. I just never had a working one. :-D

    houghi
    --
    >>>> Run the following from the bashprompt if you have the kernel sources

    for I in `find /usr/src/linux/ -name *.c`; \
    do A=`grep -i -A 1 -B 1 **** $I`;if [ "$A" != "" ]; \
    then printf "$I \n$A \n\n"; fi ;done|less

  20. Re: Watch out for 10.3 kernel (slow)

    Nikos Chantziaras wrote:
    > Btw, this assumes that all machines use the same type of CPU (all of
    > them P4, all of them Core 2, etc.) If not, you will have to configure
    > the kernel for a "generic" CPU, or take the time and compile the kernel
    > on each machine individually.


    Hey, perhaps that is why openSUSE has such a 'slow' kernel. Because they
    have to think about each and every situation. :-D

    houghi
    --
    >>>> Run the following from the bashprompt if you have the kernel sources

    for I in `find /usr/src/linux/ -name *.c`; \
    do A=`grep -i -A 1 -B 1 **** $I`;if [ "$A" != "" ]; \
    then printf "$I \n$A \n\n"; fi ;done|less

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast