From owner-freebsd-hackers  Fri May 16 19:21:15 1997
Return-Path: <owner-hackers>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id TAA01912
          for hackers-outgoing; Fri, 16 May 1997 19:21:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from parkplace.cet.co.jp (parkplace.cet.co.jp [202.32.64.1])
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id TAA01907
          for <hackers@FreeBSD.ORG>; Fri, 16 May 1997 19:21:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (michaelh@localhost) by parkplace.cet.co.jp (8.8.5/CET-v2.1) with SMTP id CAA20425; Sat, 17 May 1997 02:19:38 GMT
Date: Sat, 17 May 1997 11:19:38 +0900 (JST)
From: Michael Hancock <michaelh@cet.co.jp>
To: Christoph Kukulies <kuku@gilberto.physik.RWTH-Aachen.DE>
cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@jenolan.rutgers.edu>, hutton@isi.edu,
        hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject: Re: throughtput measurements for fast ethernet
In-Reply-To: <199705161601.SAA01821@gil.physik.rwth-aachen.de>
Message-ID: <Pine.SV4.3.95.970517111658.20339B-100000@parkplace.cet.co.jp>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, 16 May 1997, Christoph Kukulies wrote:

> Interesting.
> 
> a) I don't know how efficient the bzero() is (inline? #idef KERNEL?)
>    over a statementwise zeroing of a 20 byte structure and why this.

I think he's alluding to an object caching scheme where you don't
initialize structures except when you have to.  Doing nothing is always
faster no matter how much you optimize bzero.

Mike Hancock