Package Details: linux-pf 6.11.pf4-1

Git Clone URL: https://aur.archlinux.org/linux-pf.git (read-only, click to copy)
Package Base: linux-pf
Description: The pf-kernel and modules
Upstream URL: https://pfkernel.natalenko.name
Keywords: bbr bbr3 kernel ksm linux linux-pf pf-kernel uksm uksmd v4l2loopback zstd
Licenses: GPL-2.0-only
Provides: KSMBD-MODULE, linux-pf, NTFS3-MODULE, UKSMD-BUILTIN, V4L2LOOPBACK-MODULE, VIRTUALBOX-GUEST-MODULES, WIREGUARD-MODULE
Replaces: virtualbox-guest-modules-arch, wireguard-arch
Submitter: nous
Maintainer: post-factum
Last Packager: post-factum
Votes: 209
Popularity: 0.22
First Submitted: 2011-07-24 12:01 (UTC)
Last Updated: 2024-11-06 15:49 (UTC)

Dependencies (17)

Required by (14)

Sources (2)

Pinned Comments

post-factum commented on 2023-09-25 20:30 (UTC) (edited on 2024-10-08 14:21 (UTC) by post-factum)

Official binary builds for various x86_64 ISA levels are available here.

Latest Comments

« First ‹ Previous 1 .. 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 .. 106 Next › Last »

nous commented on 2010-11-21 18:57 (UTC)

mpsnets I've never used it and my time is really sparse.... Why don't you copy an existing PKGBUILD of, say, -kernel26-ck and create a new package, as lucak3 did with nvidia-pf?

<deleted-account> commented on 2010-11-19 12:46 (UTC)

Please You need to create the package vhba-module-pf!

graysky commented on 2010-11-18 22:23 (UTC)

Plus, see what ck has to say about it: http://ck-hack.blogspot.com/2010/11/create-task-groups-by-tty-comment.html Con Kolivas wrote: I've had every man and his dog either drop into IRC or email me asking me what my thoughts are on the grouping tasks by tty layer patch discussed here: Phoronix link and slashdot. I guess people didn't understand my 2.6.36-ck1 announcement clearly enough, so I'll quote it again here: Those following the development of the patches for interactivity at massive load, I have COMPLETELY DROPPED them as they introduce regressions at normal workloads, and I cannot under any circumstances approve changes to improve behaviour at ridiculous workloads which affect regular ones. I still see precisely zero point at optimising for absurd workloads. Proving how many un-niced jobs you can throw at your kernel compiles is not a measure of one's prowess. It is just a mindless test. Remember, I already had developed a hierarchical tree-based penalty patch for BFS and blogged about it here. I can do it in a 10 line patch for BFS, but it introduced regressions, which is why I dropped it (see earlier blog entry here: further-updates-on-hierarchical-tree). Again, I can't for the life of me see why you'd optimise for make -j64 on a quad core machine. It is one workload, unique to people who compile all the time, but done in a way you wouldn't normally do it anyway. It is not going to magically make anything else better. If for some god-forsaken reason you wanted to do that, you could already do that with nice, or even better, by running it SCHED_IDLEPRIO. nice -19 make -j 64 blahblah or schedtool -D -e make -j64 blahblah It's not really that hard folks... And if you really really really still want the feature for BFS, the patch that does the hierarchical tree based penalty is rolled into a bigger patch (so a lot more than just the 10 lines I mentioned) that can also group threads and enable/disable the features and it's still here: bfs357-penalise_fork_depth_account_threads.patch It is worth noting also that the mainline approach costs you in throughput, whereas this patch is virtually free. EDIT: I forgot to mention that for YEARS now I've been using my "toolsched" wrapper scripts that do this automatically. See toolsched for the scripts. Make always starts as SCHED_IDLEPRIO for me at home.

nous commented on 2010-11-18 21:41 (UTC)

From what I read, the patch groups tty-originated tasks, which has little to do with the desktop: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=128993894920527&w=2 Besides: 1st, the patch doesn't apply cleanly and I don't have the time to fix it and 2nd, nice(1) behaves very well with BFS.

<deleted-account> commented on 2010-11-18 19:16 (UTC)

This thinking of putting the patch on autogroup-pf? See http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=43689

nous commented on 2010-11-04 20:12 (UTC)

@fackamato: It's make's fault (and it's random). Downgrade to make from [core].

fackamato commented on 2010-11-04 19:09 (UTC)

Hm. Am I doing something wrong? It won't work for me. This is the error: IHEX2FW firmware/keyspan_pda/keyspan_pda.fw IHEX2FW firmware/keyspan_pda/xircom_pgs.fw IHEX firmware/cpia2/stv0672_vp4.bin H16TOFW firmware/vicam/firmware.fw Aborting... I've deleted the src dir but it's the same.

« First ‹ Previous 1 .. 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 .. 106 Next › Last »