Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 01 Apr 1999 09:46:18 +0100
From:      Mark Ovens <marko@uk.radan.com>
To:        Greg Lehey <grog@lemis.com>
Cc:        "Matthew D. Fuller" <fullermd@futuresouth.com>, questions@freebsd.org, FreeBSD Hackers <hackers@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Re: Debug kernel by default (was: System size with -g)
Message-ID:  <3703325A.445E99E4@uk.radan.com>
References:  <19990331003535.E17547@futuresouth.com> <19990331165139.W413@lemis.com> <19990401003831.A2788@marder-1.localhost> <19990401091616.M413@lemis.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Greg Lehey wrote:
> 
> On Thursday,  1 April 1999 at  0:38:31 +0100, Mark Ovens wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 31, 1999 at 04:51:39PM +0930, Greg Lehey wrote:
> >>
> >> Here are some comparative figures for building a kernel on my main
> >> machine (AMD K6-2/333, 160 MB memory):
> >>
> >>              normal          debug
> >> Make all     4:30            5:0
> >> Kernel size  1.8 MB          9 MB
> >> Directory size       5.5 MB          24 MB
> >>
> >
> > Out of interest I did a ``make all'' on the 3.1-R GENERIC kernel and
> > these are my figures. My machine is an AMD K6/233 (an original K6,
> > not a -2), 64MB memory, 128MB swap, U/W SCSI HD:
> >
> >               normal
> >  Make all     4:25
> >  Kernel size  2.2 MB
> >  Directory size       6.3 MB
> >
> > Are the clock and clock multiplier jumpers set correctly on your
> > m/b ;-).
> 
> I'm wondering about that, too.  I just replaced a K6/233 with a
> K6-2/333 and got almost no performance increase.  But the speed is
> reported correctly on bootup.  I'm using a really old Conner drive,
> and I suspect that's the bottleneck.
> 

Hmm, what m/b are you using (a K6-2/333 requires 100MHz doesn't it?).
I've noticed several m/b manufacturers announcing that their m/bs for
the original K6's will run K6-2s with just a BIOS u/g. I'm a bit
suspicious of that, AFAIK there are some significant architecture
differences between the K6 and K6-2. Shouldn't that require a
new/modified chipset to support properly?.

Have you'd looked at http://www.amd.com ? They have lists of m/bs that
they have tested (and approved) for each of their chips. I used that
to decide which m/b to buy (Gigabyte GA586-TX3).

Incidentally, I did this test to see how much faster a K6-2 is as I'm
debating whether to u/g to a K6-2 or wait for the K7. Guess I should
wait for the K7 :-)

> Greg
> --
> When replying to this message, please copy the original recipients.
> For more information, see http://www.lemis.com/questions.html
> See complete headers for address, home page and phone numbers
> finger grog@lemis.com for PGP public key

-- 
      FreeBSD - The Power To Serve http://www.freebsd.org
      My Webpage http://www.users.globalnet.co.uk/~markov
_______________________________________________________________
Mark Ovens, CNC Apps Engineer, Radan Computational Ltd. Bath UK
CAD/CAM solutions for Sheetmetal Working Industry
mailto:marko@uk.radan.com                  http://www.radan.com


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3703325A.445E99E4>