considering the switch to 2.6.24

[Werner Almesberger]

Andy Green wrote:
> So the status of 2.6.24-random-upstream-git for our usage is looking
> pretty decent right now.

That's wonderful news, thanks ! So I'll keep the new features I've
recently merged into our 2.6.22 tree in separate patches, to make
it easier to spot what needs applying to 2.6.24 once we switch.

Do you have any things that you'd want to get done before we switch,
or is it basically "as soon as the rest of us is ready" for you ?

> The JFFS2 mount time was about the same.

JFFS2 looks at ever block of the file system for data. So mount time
is O(partition size), not O(data in use) :-(

> Clearly we burn a lot of time scrolling that framebuffer at the moment.

Ah, doing GPU-local copies may be an interesting area for improvements
then. By the way, Dodji reported that we got a bit of a performance
boost for Xglamo "for free" (*) yesterday, by letting it have some more
memory (now 4MB, instead of 640*480*2), so that it can store off-screen
pixmaps in the frame buffer.

(*) This came as a side-effect of cleaning up allocations for RandR.

- Werner