Date: Wed, 3 Apr 2002 12:42:21 -0800 (PST) From: Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org> To: Mike Silbersack <silby@silby.com> Cc: John Regehr <regehr@cs.utah.edu>, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Linuxthreads on Linux vs FreeBSD performance question Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0204031241020.21569-100000@InterJet.elischer.org> In-Reply-To: <20020403202732.K59420-100000@patrocles.silby.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 3 Apr 2002, Mike Silbersack wrote: > > On Wed, 3 Apr 2002, John Regehr wrote: > > > Anyway, I was speculating that the higher cost is either due to (1) a > > failure, in FreeBSD, to avoid page table operations when switching > > between threads in the same addres space, or (2) some other kind of > > semantic mismatch between Linuxthreads and rfork. Is one of these > > guesses right? > > > > Any help appreciated. Thanks, > > > > John Regehr > > You may be able to learn which is the case by building a kernel with > profiling support and seeing where the hotspot is during your tests. > > Offhand, I'd guess that any of your ideas is possible. I don't believe > that much time was spent optimizing the kernel for Linuxthreads. > > Have you tried benchmarking process to process context switch times to see > if the results are similar? Also: You should run both linuxthreads binaries compile on linux (using emulation) and compiled on FreeBSD. it would be interesting to see if there is a difference.. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" 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.4.21.0204031241020.21569-100000>