From owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG  Tue Apr 29 15:27:45 2003
Return-Path: <owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: cvs-all@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 33DD437B48E; Tue, 29 Apr 2003 15:27:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from fledge.watson.org (fledge.watson.org [204.156.12.50])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 0F45743F75; Tue, 29 Apr 2003 15:27:43 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from arr@watson.org)
Received: from fledge.watson.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by fledge.watson.org (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id h3TMRp9R027809;
	Tue, 29 Apr 2003 18:27:51 -0400 (EDT)
	(envelope-from arr@watson.org)
Received: from localhost (arr@localhost)h3TMRohe027806;
	Tue, 29 Apr 2003 18:27:51 -0400 (EDT)	(envelope-from arr@watson.org)
X-Authentication-Warning: fledge.watson.org: arr owned process doing -bs
Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2003 18:27:50 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Andrew R. Reiter" <arr@watson.org>
To: Nate Williams <nate@yogotech.com>
In-Reply-To: <16046.64504.186129.388342@emerger.yogotech.com>
Message-ID: <20030429182723.N29403@fledge.watson.org>
References: <16046.55840.945040.149302@grasshopper.cs.duke.edu>
	<16046.64504.186129.388342@emerger.yogotech.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
cc: src-committers@FreeBSD.org
cc: Andrew Gallatin <gallatin@cs.duke.edu>
cc: John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org>
cc: cvs-src@FreeBSD.org
cc: "M. Warner Losh" <imp@bsdimp.com>
cc: cvs-all@FreeBSD.org
Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/dev/fxp if_fxp.c if_fxpvar.h
X-BeenThere: cvs-all@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: CVS commit messages for the entire tree <cvs-all.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-all>,
	<mailto:cvs-all-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/cvs-all>
List-Post: <mailto:cvs-all@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:cvs-all-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-all>,
	<mailto:cvs-all-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2003 22:27:45 -0000

On Tue, 29 Apr 2003, Nate Williams wrote:

:> A mutex is far more expensive than an spl.
:
:Huh?  If so, then something is *really* screwed up, since SPL's block
:out lots of things, while mutex's can/should block little things.
:
:That's how we get greater parrallelism.

Or does he mean it's more expensive b/c of the bus locks?

--
Andrew R. Reiter
arr@watson.org
arr@FreeBSD.org