From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Aug 23 11:02:05 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: current@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9255E16A41F for ; Tue, 23 Aug 2005 11:02:05 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from xdivac02@stud.fit.vutbr.cz) Received: from eva.fit.vutbr.cz (eva.fit.vutbr.cz [147.229.10.14]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E745E43D46 for ; Tue, 23 Aug 2005 11:02:04 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from xdivac02@stud.fit.vutbr.cz) Received: from eva.fit.vutbr.cz (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by eva.fit.vutbr.cz (envelope-from xdivac02@eva.fit.vutbr.cz) (8.13.4/8.13.3) with ESMTP id j7NB1wq1098650 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=EDH-RSA-DES-CBC3-SHA bits=168 verify=NO); Tue, 23 Aug 2005 13:02:01 +0200 (CEST) Received: (from xdivac02@localhost) by eva.fit.vutbr.cz (8.13.4/8.13.3/Submit) id j7NB1wfl098649; Tue, 23 Aug 2005 13:01:58 +0200 (CEST) Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2005 13:01:57 +0200 From: Divacky Roman To: Dag-Erling Sm?rgrav Message-ID: <20050823110157.GA98581@stud.fit.vutbr.cz> References: <20050821084546.GA77111@stud.fit.vutbr.cz> <20050821175406.GA36164@xor.obsecurity.org> <868xyu3wln.fsf@xps.des.no> <20050822161339.GA13907@xor.obsecurity.org> <20050823102623.GA97332@stud.fit.vutbr.cz> <86hddhvsc2.fsf@xps.des.no> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <86hddhvsc2.fsf@xps.des.no> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2i X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.49 on 147.229.10.14 Cc: current@freebsd.org, Kris Kennaway Subject: Re: [PATCH]: fdalloc optimization X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2005 11:02:05 -0000 On Tue, Aug 23, 2005 at 12:51:57PM +0200, Dag-Erling Sm?rgrav wrote: > Divacky Roman writes: > > here is my analyze of the problem - if its correct then the patch > > speeds it up > > I agree in theory, but I'll bet you a beer that you can't measure the > improvement. thats highly possible... but if the patch is correct it should be used cause its improvement (althought not measurable)