Date: Thu, 16 May 1996 10:12:33 -0700 (MST) From: Terry Lambert <terry@lambert.org> To: dyson@freebsd.org Cc: babkin@hq.icb.chel.su, hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: EDO & Memory latency Message-ID: <199605161712.KAA17376@phaeton.artisoft.com> In-Reply-To: <199605160613.BAA07537@dyson.iquest.net> from "John S. Dyson" at May 16, 96 01:13:11 am
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> There are several things going on. One is that there is propagation > time through to the main memory, it is much worse than the memory cycle > time. Of course, that does not account for all of the 400 nsecs that you > are seeing. Only about 280uS. The other 120uS are 20uS for the kernel trap and another 100uS in unrelated overhead. > You likely are seeing TLB overhead intrinsic to the processor. Some > processors don't have microcode TLB management, and you'll see worse > numbers, because the TLB needs to be handled in normal machine/assembly > code. (Of course, on those processors, you can tune the TLB management > more freely.) Some non-Intel procesors, like the Alpha and PPC, he means. Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199605161712.KAA17376>