Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2002 14:02:06 -0800 (PST) From: Kelly Yancey <kbyanc@posi.net> To: John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.ORG> Cc: Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com>, arch@FreeBSD.ORG, bmilekic@technokratis.com, imp@village.org, Mats Lofkvist <mal@algonet.se>, Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@critter.freebsd.dk> Subject: Re: 64 bit counters again Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0201151358310.21843-100000@gateway.posi.net> In-Reply-To: <XFMail.020115133310.jhb@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, 15 Jan 2002, John Baldwin wrote: > FWIW, I agree that doing 64-bit counters on IA32 is more of a pain > than its worth, so I think it's not quite the Terry vs. the world > some people would like to believe. Terry is trying to get people > to use solutions that scale. Bumping the size of the counter for > bytes doesn't scale, it just postpones the problem a little. > > If you really want a 64-bit counter, go get an alpha or when 5.0 > comes out an ultrasparc or ia64 box. > I'm sorry, but that's akin to saying that implementing SMP on i386 is more of a pain than it is worth and if you really want a good SMP implementation you should just buy a box from Sun. A legitimate engineering problem was presented, presumably there is a legitimate engineering solution. Finding one that everyone can agree on is another thing entirely... :) Kelly 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?Pine.BSF.4.21.0201151358310.21843-100000>