From owner-freebsd-current Tue Oct 29 13:46:59 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 66A5537B401 for ; Tue, 29 Oct 2002 13:46:58 -0800 (PST) Received: from apollo.backplane.com (apollo.backplane.com [216.240.41.2]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 07DE843E8A for ; Tue, 29 Oct 2002 13:46:58 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from dillon@apollo.backplane.com) Received: from apollo.backplane.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by apollo.backplane.com (8.12.5/8.12.5) with ESMTP id g9TLkvFC010976; Tue, 29 Oct 2002 13:46:57 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from dillon@apollo.backplane.com) Received: (from dillon@localhost) by apollo.backplane.com (8.12.5/8.12.5/Submit) id g9TLkvWi010975; Tue, 29 Oct 2002 13:46:57 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from dillon) Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2002 13:46:57 -0800 (PST) From: Matthew Dillon Message-Id: <200210292146.g9TLkvWi010975@apollo.backplane.com> To: Terry Lambert Cc: Raymond Kohler , current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: questions about the state of current References: <2570443.1035916854787.JavaMail.wshttp@emss03g01.ems.lmco.com> <3DBEF55E.A0F9ED1B@mindspring.com> <200210292106.g9TL6aoc010659@apollo.backplane.com> <3DBEFE24.1E9DDB89@mindspring.com> Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG :I agree that "it's to be expected", but the "it doesn't matter" :argument is pretty lame. It matters. Coming to FreeBSD the :first time, I would definitely make a decision for 4.7 vs. 5.x :if performance were an issue for me. I still have not seen a :reasonable justification for interrupt threads (for example), :except that they are easier to understand and program. : :-- Terry Interrupt threads have 'grown' on me. I like them. But I come from an embedded world where switching threads costs no more then a procedure call. The way I figure it, we will eventually be able to make -current's scheduler efficient enough such that the overhead of switching to an interrupt thread becomes a non-issue, and they take care of the big problem we've always had with interrupts under SMP... managing interrupts in an SMP environment. I am somewhat partial to the interrupt context stealing idea too, though I'm not sure if the added complexity is worth it (time may be better spent improving the scheduler). -Matt Matthew Dillon To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message