Click on Y link to download the file!!
Linux kernel 2.6.38.3 packages optimized for Ubuntu/Mint | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Packagename/Filename | 32 Bit | 64 Bit | |||||
| atom | liquorix atom | core2 and above | i3,i5 and i7 | atom | core2 and above | i3,i5 and i7 | |
| Kernel Config | Y | Y | Y | N | N | Y | Y |
| Kernel Headers | Y | Y | Y | N | N | Y | Y |
| Kernel Image | Y | Y | Y | N | N | Y | Y |
| Readme.odt | Y | Y | Y | N | N | Y | Y |
| Readme.pdf | Y | Y | Y | N | N | Y | Y |
| SHA256SUMS | Y | Y | Y | N | N | Y | Y |
| MD5SUMS | Y | Y | Y | N | N | Y | Y |
Thought this tabular form will keep things simple and avoid confusion of numerous posts of my compilation articles,
ReplyDelete;)
Compiled liquorix kernel for my friend's atom processor, updated the list for anyone who love to test or curious
ReplyDeleteliquorix kernel not as fast as vanilla linux kernel
ReplyDeletethis kernel works great. however, the only issues keeping me from using it is the beep on reboot, and synaptics touchpad scrolling not working.
ReplyDeleteHey lemme ask you something, I got your last kernel in there 2.6.38-2. It runs fine, however the same kernel was released as a regular update in debian mint (It's a rolling distro).
ReplyDeleteMy question is, when you say "optimize"... are you simply disabling support for other processor types making the kernel just a tad smaller?
I guess what i'm asking is, in what way is it faster than the standard kernel that comes with ubuntu/mint, if they were the same version? I could only see boot times improving maybe, but I could be wrong.
I was thinking about benchmarking both, however I don't know of a good comprehensive linux benchmark that does lots of different tests, cpu, ram, disk, cache, simulated user loads, db.
Do you know of a linux equivalent to Windows' PC Mark ? Although it may even run on wine.
I took vanilla kernel source and used ubuntu config with target processor core2, so it should just be compiler optimazations
ReplyDeleteLinux noob here... Just wondering, the 2.6 kernels are already set to timer freq of 250 and preempt voluntary to Y. Has anyone here tried the kernel above and notice any difference?
ReplyDeleteAlso, I think I read somewhere, the liquorix one, even though it is set at 1KHz, it shouldn't make any difference to the battery life.... I want to install the liquorix one but I thought I'll wait and see what are the feedbacks first..
Great articles/website. Helps noobs like me a lot!
Only 32 bit ubuntu kernels default to 250 HZ, 64 bit kernels of ubuntu goes with 100 HZ. You can bet battery won't be a problem with 1000 HZ provided, high resolution hardware timer is supported by the laptop. All Fedora desktop kernels use 1000 HZ by default, so we can safely follow 1000 HZ kernels.
ReplyDeletethank you very much for your work on this, i appreciate it very much. my little home server uses your atom optimized version and my daily use laptop is happily running the core2 optimized.
ReplyDelete@Anonymous- can you quantify how the liquorix kernel is slower? (boot time, responsiveness, etc.) I've started avoiding liquorix kernels because they usually lock my cpu at full speed and break frequency scaling.
Even if liquorix kernel is going with cpufrequency performance, you can make it use frequency scaling like this
ReplyDeletesudo modprobe acpi_cpufreq
sudo modprobe cpufreq_ondemand
Then you can use the ondemand governor
To make the cpufreq automatic, it needs to be added in /etc/modules
so ubuntu does this trick, it adds the cpufreq as inbuilt instead of modules and thus no need to explicitly add it to /etc/modules
!!