From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Sep 2 10:01:00 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: arch@FreeBSD.org Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 77CF816A41F; Fri, 2 Sep 2005 10:01:00 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from phk@phk.freebsd.dk) Received: from haven.freebsd.dk (haven.freebsd.dk [130.225.244.222]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 27FC043D49; Fri, 2 Sep 2005 10:01:00 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from phk@phk.freebsd.dk) Received: from phk.freebsd.dk (unknown [192.168.48.2]) by haven.freebsd.dk (Postfix) with ESMTP id A709FBC66; Fri, 2 Sep 2005 10:00:58 +0000 (UTC) To: Tom Rhodes From: "Poul-Henning Kamp" In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 02 Sep 2005 05:39:27 EDT." <20050902053927.3656b245@localhost> Date: Fri, 02 Sep 2005 12:00:58 +0200 Message-ID: <34962.1125655258@phk.freebsd.dk> Sender: phk@phk.freebsd.dk Cc: arch@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Consoles, past and future. X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 02 Sep 2005 10:01:00 -0000 In message <20050902053927.3656b245@localhost>, Tom Rhodes writes: >My question is, and I know this hasn't been tested so be my >guest and theorize a bit. Are there any performance gains >or losses as a result of taking this route? If we are concerned about the performance of /dev/console, we need our collective heads and tails smacked until we come to our senses :-) -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 phk@FreeBSD.ORG | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.