Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2006 07:50:13 -0700 From: Scott Long <scottl@samsco.org> To: Luigi Rizzo <rizzo@icir.org> Cc: current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: interesting(?) data on network interrupt servicing Message-ID: <4422B5A5.8040006@samsco.org> In-Reply-To: <20060323064805.B67264@xorpc.icir.org> References: <20060322122906.A41691@xorpc.icir.org> <20060323001555.GA1811@tin.it> <20060323142518.GA1308@tin.it> <20060323063139.A67037@xorpc.icir.org> <4422B3C8.3080303@samsco.org> <20060323064805.B67264@xorpc.icir.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Luigi Rizzo wrote: > On Thu, Mar 23, 2006 at 07:42:16AM -0700, Scott Long wrote: > >>Luigi Rizzo wrote: >> >>>On Thu, Mar 23, 2006 at 03:25:18PM +0100, Paolo Pisati wrote: > > ... > >>>>ok, i updated my CURRENT and rerun the tests (and while here >>>>i disabled SMP): >>>> >>>>phk's optimization to cpu ticks calculation shaved 4k ticks, >>> >>>this makes it a very good candidate for MFC when 6.1 is out ? > > ... > >>I haven't been paying close enough attention, have all of the calcru >>problems and other side effects been fixed from phk's work? > > > we should ask phk. As far as i remember the only "problem" > is/was that the sys/user times are computed as if the > cpu were running at its max speed. But this is in fact > a good thing because it is a more consistent measurement of > the cost of the CPU work, which decouples us from having > to take care of variable cpu speed. > > luigi No, I'm talking about all of the resulting problems with processes generating calcru messages on the console. Scott
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4422B5A5.8040006>