Date: 05 Aug 1999 11:26:09 +0200 From: Dag-Erling Smorgrav <des@flood.ping.uio.no> To: Chris <reman@tig.com.au> Cc: John-Mark Gurney <gurney_j@resnet.uoregon.edu>, Dag-Erling Smorgrav <des@flood.ping.uio.no>, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Results of investigating optimizing calloc()... Message-ID: <xzpk8rar32m.fsf@flood.ping.uio.no> In-Reply-To: Chris's message of "Thu, 05 Aug 1999 19:05:48 %2B1000" References: <001e01bedde3$d1af64c0$291c453f@kbyanc.alcnet.com> <xzpemhjpzac.fsf@flood.ping.uio.no> <19990804202932.50575@hydrogen.fircrest.net> <37A953EC.AB5E9F90@tig.com.au>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Chris <reman@tig.com.au> writes: > Anyways thats all I can think of. The only way I can see that using DMA > to refresh pages as a faster method is if the DMA controller can do it > quicker than the CPU which I doubt is likely, also it will only be > useful if it can do 32-bit addresses. Grr.. *read what I f###ing wrote* The issue is not speed, because this is something we do in the background when there's nothing else to do. The issue is to avoid thrashing the cache. DES -- Dag-Erling Smorgrav - des@flood.ping.uio.no 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?xzpk8rar32m.fsf>