From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Sep 13 14:33:10 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EAC641065670 for ; Sun, 13 Sep 2009 14:33:10 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from rihad@mail.ru) Received: from mx75.mail.ru (mx75.mail.ru [94.100.176.90]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A9A5D8FC08 for ; Sun, 13 Sep 2009 14:33:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [217.25.27.27] (port=28909 helo=[217.25.27.27]) by mx75.mail.ru with asmtp id 1Mmq8a-0006Uu-00; Sun, 13 Sep 2009 18:33:08 +0400 Message-ID: <4AAD02A2.5060207@mail.ru> Date: Sun, 13 Sep 2009 19:33:06 +0500 From: rihad User-Agent: Mozilla-Thunderbird 2.0.0.22 (X11/20090706) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Barney Cordoba References: <94372.57247.qm@web63906.mail.re1.yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: <94372.57247.qm@web63906.mail.re1.yahoo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam: Not detected X-Mras: Ok Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [POLLING] strange interrupt/system load X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 13 Sep 2009 14:33:11 -0000 Barney Cordoba wrote: > > --- On Sun, 9/13/09, rihad wrote: >> What's wrong with 64 bits? > > I haven't spent a large portion of my life trying to figure > it out exactly, but I'd guess that the larger size of the > structures and code results in fewer cache hits. Then what's wrong with also doubling cache sizes? Besides, apart from other benefits, 64-bit makes every-day big number arithmetic a single CPU instruction as opposed to several instructions required on 32-bit CPUs through bignum emulation.