From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG  Mon Sep  6 08:47:28 2004
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-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 6E08F16A4CE; Mon,  6 Sep 2004 08:47:28 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from phoenix.infradead.org (imladris.demon.co.uk [193.237.130.41])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 1CB0B43D48; Mon,  6 Sep 2004 08:47:27 +0000 (GMT)
	SRS0+3b5aba12a0c273db2f6f+379+infradead.org+hch@phoenix.srs.infradead.org)
Received: from hch by phoenix.infradead.org with local (Exim 4.30 #5 (Red Hat
	Linux))	id 1C4F9p-000173-32; Mon, 06 Sep 2004 09:47:25 +0100
Date: Mon, 6 Sep 2004 09:47:24 +0100
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
To: Robert Watson <rwatson@freebsd.org>
Message-ID: <20040906094724.A4262@infradead.org>
References: <200409042056.i84Kudsk021327@cello.qnet.com>
	<Pine.NEB.3.96L.1040905193036.417N-100000@fledge.watson.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5.1i
In-Reply-To: <Pine.NEB.3.96L.1040905193036.417N-100000@fledge.watson.org>;
	from rwatson@freebsd.org on Sun, Sep 05, 2004 at 07:31:54PM -0400
X-SRS-Rewrite: SMTP reverse-path rewritten from <hch@infradead.org> by
	phoenix.infradead.org	See http://www.infradead.org/rpr.html
cc: Paul Smith <stork@QNET.COM>
cc: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Microkernel Performance:  FreeBSD versus Darwin
X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture
	<freebsd-arch.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arch>,
	<mailto:freebsd-arch-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-arch>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-arch@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-arch-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arch>,
	<mailto:freebsd-arch-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 06 Sep 2004 08:47:28 -0000

On Sun, Sep 05, 2004 at 07:31:54PM -0400, Robert Watson wrote:
> 
> On Sat, 4 Sep 2004, Paul Smith wrote:
> 
> > Theoretically the microkernel of Darwin should create overheads harming
> > the performance.  Has anybody seen an actual study comparing the
> > performance of Darwin and FreeBSD? 
> 
> FYI, Darwin doesn't use a microkernel.  It includes code elements from
> Mach, which did use a microkernel, but those elements are integrated into
> the same address space as the remainder of the kernel (file system,
> network stack, etc).  I'm not sure I've seen any performance studies,
> regardless.

http://www-106.ibm.com/developerworks/linux/library/l-ydlg5.html?ca=dgr-mw05LinxOnG5

has some microbenchmarks for darwin vs linux