Re: em forwarding performance (was Proposed 6.2 em RELEASE patch
- From: Divacky Roman <xdivac02@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 25 Nov 2006 09:36:05 +0100
On Fri, Nov 24, 2006 at 04:18:03PM -0500, Mike Tancsa wrote:
At 04:03 PM 11/24/2006, Divacky Roman wrote:
On Fri, Nov 24, 2006 at 03:27:40PM -0500, Mike Tancsa wrote:
At 03:28 AM 11/24/2006, Massimo Lusetti wrote:
On Thu, 2006-11-23 at 11:52 -0500, Mike Tancsa wrote:
I might give OpenBSD a quick try as a reference.
That would be very interesting.
OpenBSD 4.0 i386 panics on boot.
I also posted some results with PMC compiled into the kernel
ipfw compiled into the kernel, with 1 rule
http://www.tancsa.com/pmc/
I see generic_bzero/bcopy used quite often. why dont you define
cpu I586_CPU
in your kernel config?
Hi,
I had
cpu I486_CPU
cpu I586_CPU
cpu I686_CPU
hm.. now I am confused. the rule is that having I586_CPU improves
performance because optimized bzero/bcopy is included (its not
included if you only have I686_CPU).
I dont understand why the generic version is used.
_______________________________________________
freebsd-performance@xxxxxxxxxxx mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-performance
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-performance-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxx"
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: em forwarding performance (was Proposed 6.2 em RELEASE patch
- From: Matthew D. Fuller
- Re: em forwarding performance (was Proposed 6.2 em RELEASE patch
- From: Ivan Voras
- Re: em forwarding performance (was Proposed 6.2 em RELEASE patch
- References:
- Re: em forwarding performance (was Proposed 6.2 em RELEASE patch
- From: Mike Tancsa
- Re: em forwarding performance (was Proposed 6.2 em RELEASE patch
- From: Jeremie Le Hen
- Re: em forwarding performance (was Proposed 6.2 em RELEASE patch
- From: Mike Tancsa
- Re: em forwarding performance (was Proposed 6.2 em RELEASE patch
- From: Massimo Lusetti
- Re: em forwarding performance (was Proposed 6.2 em RELEASE patch
- From: Mike Tancsa
- Re: em forwarding performance (was Proposed 6.2 em RELEASE patch
- From: Divacky Roman
- Re: em forwarding performance (was Proposed 6.2 em RELEASE patch
- From: Mike Tancsa
- Re: em forwarding performance (was Proposed 6.2 em RELEASE patch
- Prev by Date: Re: em forwarding performance (was Proposed 6.2 em RELEASE patch
- Next by Date: Re: em forwarding performance (was Proposed 6.2 em RELEASE patch
- Previous by thread: Re: em forwarding performance (was Proposed 6.2 em RELEASE patch
- Next by thread: Re: em forwarding performance (was Proposed 6.2 em RELEASE patch
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
|