From owner-freebsd-hackers Sun Nov 16 19:47:25 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id TAA07531 for hackers-outgoing; Sun, 16 Nov 1997 19:47:25 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-hackers) Received: from trojanhorse.ml.org (mdean.vip.best.com [206.86.94.101]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA07524 for ; Sun, 16 Nov 1997 19:47:21 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from jamil@trojanhorse.ml.org) Received: from localhost (jamil@localhost) by trojanhorse.ml.org (8.8.8/8.8.5) with SMTP id TAA02067; Sun, 16 Nov 1997 19:47:03 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 16 Nov 1997 19:47:03 -0800 (PST) From: "Jamil J. Weatherbee" To: Charles Mott cc: Joerg Wunsch , hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Reading kernel memory In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk > Does anyone know what the response time for gettimeofday() is on a > reasonably modern Pentium? It is about 60 microseconds on my ancient 386. I wrote some test code for this, included below. My results (as measured by this code) Machine Calls Latency PPro-180 999998 4.06us Nexgen P-100 999977 23.92us Pentium-100 999987 4.81us Cyrix-PR166 999996 5.82us I guess that kinda says something bad about that NexGen machine I used to test the AIOX driver, mainly that it is slow, which for testing I guess is kinda good. Maybye it is just slower in the call gate or something because computational I think it is a bit faster than the Pentium 100 (at least that is my experience with the equally equipped machines). ------------------------ The Code ------------------------------------- #include #include #define TESTLEN 1000000 void main (void) { struct timeval a,b; long d; long t = 0; int x, c= 0; for (x=0;x