From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Fri May 7 00:05:01 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F220916A4CE; Fri, 7 May 2004 00:05:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from vhost109.his.com (vhost109.his.com [216.194.225.101]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1C6B943D2F; Fri, 7 May 2004 00:05:00 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from brad.knowles@skynet.be) Received: from [10.0.1.2] (localhost.his.com [127.0.0.1]) by vhost109.his.com (8.12.8p2/8.12.3) with ESMTP id i4774n2C067236; Fri, 7 May 2004 03:04:58 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from brad.knowles@skynet.be) Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: bs663385@pop.skynet.be Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: Date: Fri, 7 May 2004 08:50:51 +0200 To: Robert Watson From: Brad Knowles Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" cc: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org cc: John Baldwin Subject: Re: 4.7 vs 5.2.1 SMP/UP bridging performance X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 07 May 2004 07:05:01 -0000 At 10:55 PM -0400 2004/05/06, Robert Watson wrote: > On occasion, I've had conversations with Peter Wemm about providing HAL > modules with optimized versions of various common routines for specific > hardware platforms. However, that would require us to make a trade-off > between the performance benefits of inlining and the performance benefits > of a HAL module... I'm confused. Couldn't you just do this sort of stuff as conditional macros, which would have both benefits? -- Brad Knowles, "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." -Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania. SAGE member since 1995. See for more info.