Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 11 Jun 1999 20:45:19 -0700 (PDT)
From:      Bill Huey <billh@mag.ucsd.edu>
To:        wes@softweyr.com (Wes Peters)
Cc:        freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: High syscall overhead?
Message-ID:  <199906120345.UAA01670@mag.ucsd.edu>
In-Reply-To: <3761BD22.782508D3@softweyr.com> from "Wes Peters" at Jun 11, 99 07:51:30 pm

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help

> Try a more meaningful benchmark, one that actually does something in
> the kernel before returning, and see how they do.  Try calling kill
> or socket/close a few hundred thousand times and see how they do.

Or that horribily impracticle wake-one semantics implemented under
SMP for the accept() function with recent Linux kernels to prevent
overscheduling.

Or another really useless thing like releasing a MP lock in the TCP/IP
stack the increases user space copies by a factor of 4 times in the
Linux kernel.

FreeBSD still using a single big kernel lock which slows down certain
unimportant things like getting every so slow course grained kernel lock ?

Are things breaking with all the new changes in the FreeBSD kernel ?

Uh, "yes" to the two above questions  ?

> Wes Peters                                                 Softweyr LLC

bill



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?199906120345.UAA01670>