Date: Thu, 25 May 2000 09:13:59 -0700 (PDT) From: Matthew Dillon <dillon@apollo.backplane.com> To: Chuck Paterson <cp@bsdi.com> Cc: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@zippy.cdrom.com>, Terry Lambert <tlambert@primenet.com>, arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Preemptive kernel on older X86 hardware Message-ID: <200005251613.JAA82872@apollo.backplane.com> References: <200005250844.CAA19436@berserker.bsdi.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
:
: The good news is that the actual implementation of the
:mutexs is machine dependent and can change wildly over different
:architectures with no need for the callers to know.
:
:Chuck
:
:"Jordan K. Hubbard" wrote on: Thu, 25 May 2000 01:31:23 PDT
:}> On intel anyway, subroutine calls are *cheap*, especially compared
:}> to the overhead of a locked instruction or even an L1 cache miss.
:}
:}I don't believe this is true on all the architectures FreeBSD is
:}anticipated to run on in the "near future", however.
:}
:}- Jordan
Lets use subroutines during development at least, it will make
things easier. I don't think anyone can argue with that :-)
-Matt
Matthew Dillon
<dillon@backplane.com>
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200005251613.JAA82872>