From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Apr 24 05:14:38 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: current@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4204016A403; Tue, 24 Apr 2007 05:14:38 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jmg@hydrogen.funkthat.com) Received: from hydrogen.funkthat.com (gate.funkthat.com [69.17.45.168]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 168C813C44B; Tue, 24 Apr 2007 05:14:37 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jmg@hydrogen.funkthat.com) Received: from hydrogen.funkthat.com (8z9a68cp2s4vugpw@localhost.funkthat.com [127.0.0.1]) by hydrogen.funkthat.com (8.13.6/8.13.3) with ESMTP id l3O5EYsD080749; Mon, 23 Apr 2007 22:14:34 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from jmg@hydrogen.funkthat.com) Received: (from jmg@localhost) by hydrogen.funkthat.com (8.13.6/8.13.3/Submit) id l3O5EYQq080748; Mon, 23 Apr 2007 22:14:34 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from jmg) Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2007 22:14:34 -0700 From: John-Mark Gurney To: David G Lawrence Message-ID: <20070424051433.GT73385@funkthat.com> Mail-Followup-To: David G Lawrence , Tim Kientzle , current@freebsd.org, "Jesper B. Rosenkilde" References: <20070423113400.GC28587@gw.humppa.dk> <462CD251.9060105@freebsd.org> <20070423161711.GV39474@elvis.mu.org> <462D821F.6030707@freebsd.org> <20070424042102.GI38475@tnn.dglawrence.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20070424042102.GI38475@tnn.dglawrence.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i X-Operating-System: FreeBSD 5.4-RELEASE-p6 i386 X-Files: The truth is out there X-URL: http://resnet.uoregon.edu/~gurney_j/ X-Resume: http://resnet.uoregon.edu/~gurney_j/resume.html Cc: Tim Kientzle , current@freebsd.org, "Jesper B. Rosenkilde" Subject: Re: Suggestions on Avoiding syscall Overhead X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: John-Mark Gurney List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2007 05:14:38 -0000 David Greenman wrote this message on Mon, Apr 23, 2007 at 21:21 -0700: > every process for process-specific data, however - the cost of allocating > it, initializing it, etc, for every fork() would be a pessimization in > most cases, I think. You could always do something similar to a COW, where once it is accessed, it is allocated and filled w/ the specific information necessary... If it never gets used, it never gets allocated... -- John-Mark Gurney Voice: +1 415 225 5579 "All that I will do, has been done, All that I have, has not."