Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2003 09:57:42 +1030 From: Greg 'groggy' Lehey <grog@FreeBSD.org> To: Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au> Cc: Nate Lawson <nate@root.org> Subject: Re: Checksum/copy (was: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/netinet ip_output.c) Message-ID: <20030327232742.GA80113@wantadilla.lemis.com> In-Reply-To: <20030327180247.D1825@gamplex.bde.org> References: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0303260956250.27748-100000@root.org> <20030326225530.G2075@odysseus.silby.com> <20030327180247.D1825@gamplex.bde.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--T4sUOijqQbZv57TR Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline On Thursday, 27 March 2003 at 19:07:15 +1100, Bruce Evans wrote: > On Wed, 26 Mar 2003, Mike Silbersack wrote: >> On my Mobile Celeron, a for (i = 0; i < max; i++) array[i]=0 runs >> faster than bzero. :( > > Saved data from my benchmarks show that bzero (stosl) was OK on > 486's, poor on original Pentiums, OK on K6-1's, best by far on > second generation Celerons (ones like PII) and poor on Athlon XP's > (but not as relatively bad as on original Pentiums). What happened to i686_bzero? I was sure that years ago one existed, but now all machines I use (i686 class) all use generic_bzero. Greg -- See complete headers for address and phone numbers --T4sUOijqQbZv57TR Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.0 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQE+g4juIubykFB6QiMRAplxAKCTS04sQ0iuGkMAtimcijE9X+dJ7wCfXXVO TlakzRPdXai1N99jg9ZGTeo= =Dxlr -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --T4sUOijqQbZv57TR--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030327232742.GA80113>