From owner-freebsd-chat Thu Jun 6 17: 4:53 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from serenity.mcc.ac.uk (serenity.mcc.ac.uk [130.88.200.93]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 61AFF37B403 for ; Thu, 6 Jun 2002 17:04:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dogma.freebsd-uk.eu.org ([130.88.200.97]) by serenity.mcc.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 2.05 #6) id 17G7FG-000PU6-00; Fri, 7 Jun 2002 01:04:46 +0100 Received: (from jcm@localhost) by dogma.freebsd-uk.eu.org (8.11.6/8.11.1) id g5704kI79866; Fri, 7 Jun 2002 01:04:46 +0100 (BST) (envelope-from jcm) Date: Fri, 7 Jun 2002 01:04:46 +0100 From: j mckitrick To: "Kurt J. Lidl" , freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: SMP/5.0 performance on single CPU? Message-ID: <20020607010446.A79818@dogma.freebsd-uk.eu.org> References: <20020606230545.A78993@dogma.freebsd-uk.eu.org> <20020606183134.A7789@pix.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 1.0.1i In-Reply-To: <20020606183134.A7789@pix.net>; from lidl@pix.net on Thu, Jun 06, 2002 at 06:31:34PM -0400 Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org | I don't know how much overhead the locking system that FreeBSD is | using will impose on a uniprocessor machine, but I would guess | anywhere from 10%-25% slower. I think that only 10% would be pretty | impressive for the very first release. Again -- this is a *guess*. Any idea if a custom kernel can completely leave out the SMP code and end up comparable to 4.x? | They are taking a very reasonable course of getting it correct before | worrying about getting it as fast as possible... Which is the best way to do it, clearly. jm -- There are only 10 types of people in this world: those who understand binary, and those who don't. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message