From owner-freebsd-current  Sat Apr  8 11:10:14 1995
Return-Path: current-owner
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
          by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) id LAA19873
          for current-outgoing; Sat, 8 Apr 1995 11:10:14 -0700
Received: from ref.tfs.com (ref.tfs.com [140.145.254.251])
          by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) with ESMTP id LAA19867
          for <freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org>; Sat, 8 Apr 1995 11:10:13 -0700
Received: (from phk@localhost) by ref.tfs.com (8.6.8/8.6.6) id LAA22532; Sat, 8 Apr 1995 11:10:04 -0700
From: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@ref.tfs.com>
Message-Id: <199504081810.LAA22532@ref.tfs.com>
Subject: Re: Disk performance
To: taob@gate.sinica.edu.tw (Brian Tao)
Date: Sat, 8 Apr 1995 11:10:04 -0700 (PDT)
Cc: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org
In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSI.3.91.950408214953.787U-100000@aries.ibms.sinica.edu.tw> from "Brian Tao" at Apr 8, 95 09:51:56 pm
Content-Type: text
Content-Length: 379       
Sender: current-owner@FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

>     Why would taking out the L2 cache slow down data transfer to and
> from the primary cache?

because checking the L2 takes time, and they don't start the mem-cycle
until they know they missed.

-- 
Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@login.dknet.dk> -- TRW Financial Systems, Inc.
'All relevant people are pertinent' && 'All rude people are impertinent'
=> 'no rude people are relevant'