From owner-freebsd-hackers Sun May 31 21:34:56 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id VAA26886 for freebsd-hackers-outgoing; Sun, 31 May 1998 21:34:56 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from cimlogic.com.au (cimlog.lnk.telstra.net [139.130.51.31]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id VAA26877 for ; Sun, 31 May 1998 21:34:48 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from jb@cimlogic.com.au) Received: (from jb@localhost) by cimlogic.com.au (8.8.8/8.8.7) id OAA16625; Mon, 1 Jun 1998 14:43:33 +1000 (EST) (envelope-from jb) From: John Birrell Message-Id: <199806010443.OAA16625@cimlogic.com.au> Subject: Re: sigprocmask() and threads question In-Reply-To: from Jason Evans at "May 31, 98 08:58:43 pm" To: jasone@canonware.com Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 14:43:33 +1000 (EST) Cc: freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL40 (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Jason Evans wrote: > After doing some profiling of some multithreaded code I'm developing under > FreeBSD, I decided to take a look at the code to see why even for > single-threaded applications, more than half the time is spent in > sigprocmask(). You must be doing this on 2.2.x 3.0-current has changed away from this implementation. If anything, please spend your time profiling the current code. You should be able to use a current libc_r on 2.2.6 AFAIK. -- John Birrell - jb@cimlogic.com.au; jb@freebsd.org http://www.cimlogic.com.au/ CIMlogic Pty Ltd, GPO Box 117A, Melbourne Vic 3001, Australia +61 418 353 137 To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message