From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Jun 13 07:38:38 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D99F216A479 for ; Wed, 13 Jun 2007 07:38:38 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from youshi10@u.washington.edu) Received: from mxout5.cac.washington.edu (mxout5.cac.washington.edu [140.142.32.135]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AB3D013C4BD for ; Wed, 13 Jun 2007 07:38:38 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from youshi10@u.washington.edu) Received: from smtp.washington.edu (smtp.washington.edu [140.142.32.141] (may be forged)) by mxout5.cac.washington.edu (8.13.7+UW06.06/8.13.7+UW07.05) with ESMTP id l5D7ccM5029290 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK) for ; Wed, 13 Jun 2007 00:38:38 -0700 X-Auth-Received: from [192.168.10.45] (c-24-10-12-194.hsd1.ca.comcast.net [24.10.12.194]) (authenticated authid=youshi10) by smtp.washington.edu (8.13.7+UW06.06/8.13.7+UW07.03) with ESMTP id l5D7cbLl025929 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Wed, 13 Jun 2007 00:38:38 -0700 Message-ID: <466F9EFE.9020402@u.washington.edu> Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2007 00:38:38 -0700 From: Garrett Cooper User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.0 (Windows/20070326) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org References: <466F7FD1.2020303@u.washington.edu> In-Reply-To: <466F7FD1.2020303@u.washington.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-PMX-Version: 5.3.1.294258, Antispam-Engine: 2.5.1.298604, Antispam-Data: 2007.6.13.2438 X-Uwash-Spam: Gauge=IIIIIII, Probability=7%, Report='__CP_URI_IN_BODY 0, __CT 0, __CTE 0, __CT_TEXT_PLAIN 0, __HAS_MSGID 0, __MIME_TEXT_ONLY 0, __MIME_VERSION 0, __SANE_MSGID 0, __USER_AGENT 0' Subject: Re: Reason for doing malloc / bzero over calloc (performance)? X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2007 07:38:39 -0000 Garrett Cooper wrote: > Title says it all -- is there a particular reason why malloc/bzero > should be used instead of calloc? > -Garrett As someone just brought to my attention, I should do some Googling. Initial results brought up this: . I would like to provide results for CURRENT, but I don't know offhand what C interface right supports nanoseconds or microseconds precision timing in FreeBSD (apart from just doing nanosleeps, which isn't such a great idea and can drift I would think due to clock skew). The original author's solution is for Mac OSX only :(.. I think it's decided though -- calloc for now wins over malloc / bzero, so I'm going to change that alloc/bzero to reflect the change. -Garrett