From owner-freebsd-net Mon Sep 9 9:45:15 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.FreeBSD.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0761237B400 for ; Mon, 9 Sep 2002 09:45:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailtoaster1.pipeline.ch (mailtoaster1.pipeline.ch [62.48.0.70]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id E17C843E4A for ; Mon, 9 Sep 2002 09:45:10 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from oppermann@pipeline.ch) Received: (qmail 82949 invoked from network); 9 Sep 2002 16:42:49 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO pipeline.ch) ([62.48.0.54]) (envelope-sender ) by mailtoaster1.pipeline.ch (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP for ; 9 Sep 2002 16:42:49 -0000 Message-ID: <3D7CCFEC.8719520F@pipeline.ch> Date: Mon, 09 Sep 2002 18:44:28 +0200 From: Andre Oppermann X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.76 [en] (Windows NT 5.0; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Harti Brandt Cc: Petr Holub , net@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: 32 bit couters in netstat References: <20020909181135.K30835-100000@beagle.fokus.gmd.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Harti Brandt wrote: > > On Mon, 9 Sep 2002, Andre Oppermann wrote: > > AO>Harti Brandt wrote: > AO>> > AO>> On Mon, 9 Sep 2002, Petr Holub wrote: > AO>> > AO>> PH>> > I've just found that netstat in FreeBSD 4.4 has just 32 bit couters > AO>> PH>> > (compared to 64 bit counters in NetBSD), at least for Ibytes and Obytes. > AO>> PH>> > Is there any improvement in this respect in -STABLE or in -CURRENT? > AO>> PH>> > AO>> PH>> No because certain people argue that having a 64 bit counter slows > AO>> PH>> down the machine to the level of a 386SX-16 and who needs large > AO>> PH>> counters anyway... > AO>> PH> > AO>> PH>I don't think NetBSD is slow that way ;o))). > AO>> > AO>> If you search the archives you will find the arguments. As far as I > AO>> remember the problem is to do the counter update atomically correct. > AO> > AO>Yes. Doing a 64 bit atomically add even on UP machines takes a couple > AO>a CPU cycles more. But does that matter with 2.8GHz machines? > > Not everyone has the money to buy a new machine each time one comes out. > > It may matter for people having a 486 in the corner to do their local > routing. It may also matter for people that never look at their counters. The moment you enable ipfw you get 64bit ipfw packet|byte counters anyway... one more doesn't matter at all. > But as I said already, refer to the archives. Make it a macro so everone can choose what fits best: if < I586 make32bitcounters else make64bitaotmiccounters -- Andre To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message