From owner-freebsd-hackers Tue Jan 23 00:09:34 1996 Return-Path: owner-hackers Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) id AAA13432 for hackers-outgoing; Tue, 23 Jan 1996 00:09:34 -0800 (PST) Received: from hq.icb.chel.su (icb-rich-gw.icb.chel.su [193.125.10.34]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) with SMTP id AAA13392 for ; Tue, 23 Jan 1996 00:08:41 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (babkin@localhost) by hq.icb.chel.su (8.6.5/8.6.5) id NAA27867; Tue, 23 Jan 1996 13:04:37 +0500 From: "Serge A. Babkin" Message-Id: <199601230804.NAA27867@hq.icb.chel.su> Subject: Re: stanford benchmark/usenix To: davidg@Root.COM Date: Tue, 23 Jan 1996 13:04:36 +0500 (GMT+0500) Cc: hasty@rah.star-gate.com, rmallory@wiley.csusb.edu, freebsd-hackers@freefall.FreeBSD.ORG In-Reply-To: <199601220945.BAA14112@Root.COM> from "David Greenman" at Jan 22, 96 01:45:25 am X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23] Content-Type: text Sender: owner-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk > > >Do we have pentium optimized bcopy and bzero ? > > > >Because some of the benchmarks could clearly benefit from them. > > After reading the Usenix paper on OS performance on Pentium machines, I'm > inclined to add optimized code to our libc. Basically, get the processor type > (probably via sysctl) and use this to control which versions are called - > similar to what I recently did with bzero in the kernel. > ...This is fairly low priority, however, so won't likely happen for a few > months. May be it will be simpler to have several versions of dynamic libraries optimized for different processors and to install the one needed for this box. -SB