From owner-freebsd-smp Tue Feb 26 20:34:56 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Received: from fledge.watson.org (fledge.watson.org [204.156.12.50]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DCF3D37B400 for ; Tue, 26 Feb 2002 20:34:53 -0800 (PST) Received: from fledge.watson.org (fledge.pr.watson.org [192.0.2.3]) by fledge.watson.org (8.11.6/8.11.5) with SMTP id g1R4YAD41622; Tue, 26 Feb 2002 23:34:10 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from robert@fledge.watson.org) Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2002 23:34:09 -0500 (EST) From: Robert Watson X-Sender: robert@fledge.watson.org To: Terry Lambert Cc: Bob Van Valzah , Jorge Aldana , Garance A Drosihn , smp@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Performance vs. Stable In-Reply-To: <3C7C60BA.3FBDB9A0@mindspring.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Tue, 26 Feb 2002, Terry Lambert wrote: > Thus such calls have zero system call overhead. > > Similar shortcuts can be had for other read-values, such as getgid, > getgroups, etc., etc. (hacks required in the set call wrapper for fork, > etc., obviously). > > Using a write of /dev/null is an attempt to work around this; of > course, you could special case that, as well, in user space, but it'd be > more work than Larry thinks most people will go to to cheat on the > benchmark (Hi Larry! 8-)). Yeah, that was my recollection as to why the switch from getpid() was made. :-) For people who are willing to be honest, getpid() is a far better measure. For those that aren't, well... BTW, we can likely remove Giant from getpid() and that should help. :-) Robert N M Watson FreeBSD Core Team, TrustedBSD Project robert@fledge.watson.org NAI Labs, Safeport Network Services To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message