Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 23 Apr 2008 11:05:25 +0100 (BST)
From:      Robert Watson <rwatson@FreeBSD.org>
To:        Darren Reed <darrenr@freebsd.org>
Cc:        arch@freebsd.org, freebsd-current@freebsd.org, "Christian S.J. Peron" <csjp@FreeBSD.org>
Subject:   Re: HEADS UP: zerocopy bpf commits impending
Message-ID:  <20080423110419.M35222@fledge.watson.org>
In-Reply-To: <1208944957.9641.1249417345@webmail.messagingengine.com>
References:  <20080317133029.GA19369@sub.vaned.net> <20080317134335.A3253@fledge.watson.org> <47FB586F.90606@freebsd.org> <20080408132058.U10870@fledge.watson.org> <1208944957.9641.1249417345@webmail.messagingengine.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help

On Wed, 23 Apr 2008, Darren Reed wrote:

> Out of curiosity, were those numbers for single cpu/core systems or systems 
> with more than one cpu/core active/available?
>
> I know the testing I did was all single threaded, so moving time from kernel 
> to user couldn't be expected to make a large overall difference in a non-SMP 
> kernel (NetBSD-something at the time.)

I believe all multi-core.

BTW, if you are set up to do performance measurement on BPF, we'd really love 
to see further feedback relating to successful or unsuccessful measurement.

Robert N M Watson
Computer Laboratory
University of Cambridge



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20080423110419.M35222>