Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2001 10:59:45 -0500 From: Jake Burkholder <jburkholder0829@home.com> To: Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au> Cc: Dag-Erling Smorgrav <des@ofug.org>, David Malone <dwmalone@maths.tcd.ie>, current@FreeBSD.ORG, jhb@FreeBSD.ORG, jake@FreeBSD.ORG, Ian Dowse <iedowse@maths.tcd.ie> Subject: Re: Interesting backtrace... Message-ID: <20010319155945.A3FA2BA69@k7.rchrd1.on.wave.home.com> In-Reply-To: Message from Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au> of "Mon, 19 Mar 2001 15:16:11 %2B1100." <Pine.BSF.4.21.0103191449460.33565-100000@besplex.bde.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> On 19 Mar 2001, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote: > > > Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au> writes: > > > K6-2's aren't really i586's and i586_bzero should never be used for > > > them (generic bzero is faster), > > > > Wrong. I fixed machdep.c to compute and print the bandwidth correctly: > > Wrong yourself. The fpu is too slow to use for copying for everything > except original Pentiums. The bandwidth test is just done to avoid hard- > configuring this knowledge. > If this is the case, is there much point in keeping the fpu register bcopy and bzero at all? To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20010319155945.A3FA2BA69>