What makes you say that? Are you seeing the problem as well?
Not definitively, but many others have also complained since it went
in. It's one of the things Mark is trying to address by moving it to a
kthread.
It _is_ most likely the random device, and I have a kthread improvement;
Hi,
Has anyone else noticed that -CURRENT is a bit "jumpy"? I notice for
example when simply typing commands prompt that the process will
"stick" or "hang" only for about 100-200ms or so and then come back to
life. The system is otherwise idle (happens also in single-user.)
It's -CURRENT
On Fri, 1 Sep 2000, Paul Herman wrote:
Has anyone else noticed that -CURRENT is a bit "jumpy"? I notice for
It's probably the new /dev/random implementation. It's being worked on.
Kris
--
In God we Trust -- all others must submit an X.509 certificate.
-- Charles Forsythe [EMAIL
On Fri, 01 Sep 2000 03:07:33 MST, Kris Kennaway wrote:
On Fri, 1 Sep 2000, Paul Herman wrote:
Has anyone else noticed that -CURRENT is a bit "jumpy"? I notice for
It's probably the new /dev/random implementation. It's being worked on.
What makes you say that? Are you seeing the
On Fri, 1 Sep 2000, Sheldon Hearn wrote:
On Fri, 01 Sep 2000 03:07:33 MST, Kris Kennaway wrote:
On Fri, 1 Sep 2000, Paul Herman wrote:
Has anyone else noticed that -CURRENT is a bit "jumpy"? I notice for
It's probably the new /dev/random implementation. It's being worked on.
On Fri, 1 Sep 2000, Kris Kennaway wrote:
On Fri, 1 Sep 2000, Sheldon Hearn wrote:
Has anyone else noticed that -CURRENT is a bit "jumpy"? I notice for
It's probably the new /dev/random implementation. It's being worked on.
What makes you say that? Are you seeing the problem
