From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Aug 25 11:06:59 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AF14916A4BF for ; Mon, 25 Aug 2003 11:06:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from kientzle.com (h-66-166-149-50.SNVACAID.covad.net [66.166.149.50]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8ED9943FDD for ; Mon, 25 Aug 2003 11:06:58 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from kientzle@acm.org) Received: from acm.org (big.x.kientzle.com [66.166.149.54]) by kientzle.com (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id h7PI6vsE052438; Mon, 25 Aug 2003 11:06:57 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from kientzle@acm.org) Message-ID: <3F4A5070.6010508@acm.org> Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2003 11:07:44 -0700 From: Tim Kientzle User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD i386; en-US; rv:1.3.1) Gecko/20030524 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Garrett Wollman References: <3F4A1CE2.6080806@freebsd.org> <20030825164907.GA17503@dragon.nuxi.com> <3F4A43EA.9090500@tcoip.com.br> <200308251735.h7PHZ9bd094222@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu> In-Reply-To: <200308251735.h7PHZ9bd094222@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit cc: current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: HTT on current X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list Reply-To: kientzle@acm.org List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2003 18:06:59 -0000 Garrett Wollman wrote: > The problem is that the P4 is not very wide to begin with, and it's very > hard to optimize well for that 23-stage pipeline. I'll say. I spent months tuning some assembly code for P3 and P4 and was quite disappointed that the P4 consistently required more CPU cycles for the same code. Only the P4s faster clock kept it from actually being slower than the P3. I attribute a lot of that to the P4s long pipeline. Tim