From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Dec 31 03:23:37 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C7B5316A41F for ; Sat, 31 Dec 2005 03:23:37 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from kris@obsecurity.org) Received: from elvis.mu.org (elvis.mu.org [192.203.228.196]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3FC2543D5F for ; Sat, 31 Dec 2005 03:23:37 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from kris@obsecurity.org) Received: from obsecurity.dyndns.org (elvis.mu.org [192.203.228.196]) by elvis.mu.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1EDF01A3C1C; Fri, 30 Dec 2005 19:23:37 -0800 (PST) Received: by obsecurity.dyndns.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 58AAA515AE; Fri, 30 Dec 2005 22:23:36 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 30 Dec 2005 22:23:36 -0500 From: Kris Kennaway To: Ian Lord Message-ID: <20051231032336.GA65560@xor.obsecurity.org> References: <43B2F0A8.2030609@freebsd.org> <43B2F236.80903@rogers.com> <43B363FE.60906@obsecurity.org> <7.0.0.16.2.20051229084332.0403ca58@Msdi.ca> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="jI8keyz6grp/JLjh" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <7.0.0.16.2.20051229084332.0403ca58@Msdi.ca> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: RELENG_6: Which scheduler for SMP? X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 31 Dec 2005 03:23:37 -0000 --jI8keyz6grp/JLjh Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Thu, Dec 29, 2005 at 08:45:34AM -0500, Ian Lord wrote: > Then what's the point of ULE if it's slower then 4BSD ? Is it more=20 > stable, more... ? I compiled my kernel with ULE since I though it=20 > would be better but you are starting to make me regret my decision :)=20 > (I didn't benchmark both options, still in developpement right now,=20 > nothing in production) Partly research purposes, and it was originally hoped that it would be faster (and it probably was for a while). It needs more work, which is what is meant by "still experimental". Kris --jI8keyz6grp/JLjh Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFDtfm3Wry0BWjoQKURAmkuAJwMntNLTbP0AqHkAHtC9Hs9HOzBiwCdG9Yi j6TXHZ5YzzPFJLLYL6+TsF4= =JFoT -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --jI8keyz6grp/JLjh--