From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Tue May 24 20:37:55 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D2CC816A41C for ; Tue, 24 May 2005 20:37:55 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from kkowalik@uci.agh.edu.pl) Received: from galaxy.uci.agh.edu.pl (galaxy.uci.agh.edu.pl [149.156.96.9]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 781EF43D48 for ; Tue, 24 May 2005 20:37:55 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from kkowalik@uci.agh.edu.pl) Received: by galaxy.uci.agh.edu.pl (Postfix, from userid 1001) id D312BAF3EE; Tue, 24 May 2005 22:37:53 +0200 (CEST) Date: Tue, 24 May 2005 22:37:53 +0200 From: Krzysztof Kowalik To: Kris Kennaway Message-ID: <20050524203753.GA28484@uci.agh.edu.pl> References: <3248.172.16.0.199.1116876092.squirrel@172.16.0.1> <20050523195123.GA13810@xor.obsecurity.org> <3482.172.16.0.199.1116882013.squirrel@172.16.0.1> <20050523211307.GA36552@xor.obsecurity.org> <42924949.1070902@incubus.de> <20050523213155.GA46718@xor.obsecurity.org> <20050524143726.GA29642@uci.agh.edu.pl> <20050524162034.GA59728@xor.obsecurity.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20050524162034.GA59728@xor.obsecurity.org> Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Performance of 4.x vs 5.x (Re: Lifetime of FreeBSD branches) X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 24 May 2005 20:37:56 -0000 Kris Kennaway [kris@obsecurity.org] wrote: > > I didn't see any visible difference, in the given scenario of > > uncompressing firefox's sources, when tried mpsafevfs's patches when > > they got announced on current@. > There have been a *lot* of changes in this area since the initial > patches (i.e. continued removal of Giant), so you'd really need to > re-test on a recent version of 6.0 to be definitive. Could be. Though given my present experience with 5.4-RELEASE, where I have no problems on my current hardware, I'd assume the issues I used to observe were not really VFS/Giant related. And yes, I ruled the USB issue out as well. I will try to put my hands on the mentioned AMD box once again, to run some current 6.0 on it. -- Krzysztof Kowalik | () ASCII Ribbon Campaign Computer Center, AGH UST | /\ Support plain text e-mail