Date: 20 Nov 1998 10:45:53 -0600 From: Joel Ray Holveck <joelh@gnu.org> To: Marius Bendiksen <Marius.Bendiksen@scancall.no> Cc: Terry Lambert <tlambert@primenet.com>, dillon@apollo.backplane.com (Matthew Dillon), rnordier@nordier.com, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: FreeBSD on i386 memory model Message-ID: <86hfvuia7y.fsf@detlev.UUCP> In-Reply-To: Marius Bendiksen's message of "Fri, 20 Nov 1998 10:34:42 %2B0100" References: <199811181842.KAA06180@apollo.backplane.com> <3.0.5.32.19981120103442.0099f460@mail.scancall.no>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>>> On the 386 and 486, call gates are faster. On the pentium, >>> pentium-PRO, and pentium-II, interrupts are faster. > With regards to this, might it not be a good idea to use a different > syscall convention, based on whether you've got the 486/384 options in your > kernel or not? It would require changing libc to read the kernel config file. Do we really want to mess with this? Happy hacking, joelh -- Joel Ray Holveck - joelh@gnu.org Fourth law of programming: Anything that can go wrong wi sendmail: segmentation violation - core dumped 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?86hfvuia7y.fsf>