From owner-freebsd-hackers  Mon Jul 14 16:37:55 1997
Return-Path: <owner-hackers>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id QAA21852
          for hackers-outgoing; Mon, 14 Jul 1997 16:37:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from misery.sdf.com (misery.sdf.com [204.244.210.193])
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id QAA21847;
          Mon, 14 Jul 1997 16:37:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from tom by misery.sdf.com with smtp (Exim 1.62 #1)
	id 0wnubk-0005kw-00; Mon, 14 Jul 1997 16:32:44 -0700
Date: Mon, 14 Jul 1997 16:32:43 -0700 (PDT)
From: Tom Samplonius <tom@sdf.com>
To: BRiGHTMN <brightmn@a-v25.rh.sunyit.edu>
cc: hackers@freebsd.org, smp@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: interrupt latency 
In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.3.95q.970626184310.5426D-100000@server.local.sunyit.edu>
Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.3.95q.970714163130.22122A-100000@misery.sdf.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-hackers@freebsd.org
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk


On Thu, 26 Jun 1997, BRiGHTMN wrote:

> dedicate a 600+$ CPU only to interupt control?
> doesn't sound very cost effective, that would mean a 2 CPU machine would
> almost "loose" a CPU...

  I guess you missed that the thread here was to measure interupt latency.
The above is a way to do that.  

Tom