Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 2 Sep 1999 11:16:34 -0700 (PDT)
From:      Julian Elischer <julian@whistle.com>
To:        nsayer@FreeBSD.ORG
Cc:        freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: CFD: "bogomips" CPU performance metric
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSF.3.95.990902111506.3714C-100000@current1.whistle.com>
In-Reply-To: <37CEB68D.848BDAF8@sftw.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
There was such a thing in 386BSD and FreeBSD1.0

I certainly thing it was a worth-while thing.
I'd try make the loop as similar to the Linux one so that they are
comparable.

On Thu, 2 Sep 1999, Nick Sayer wrote:

> Linux generates a meric of CPU performance as a byproduct of calibrating
> a delay loop.
> We don't require doing any such thing, and so adding it would be purely
> cosmetic.
> However, I allege that cosmetic things aren't in and of themselves evil,
> so long as
> they don't break anything in the process.
> 
> I would like to generate a number that will hopefully be reasonably
> compatible with
> the one Linux spits out. The best method I have come up with is to have
> a similar
> (the same?) count down loop in assembler. Have it count down from
> 1,000,000 and
> see how much nanotime() has gone by. NANSPERSEC/nansused = bogomips.
> A 1 bogomips machine will take an extra second to do this (anything
> likely to be
> even able to run FreeBSD should exceed 1 BM - yes, ha ha), and a kBM CPU
> 
> can do it in 1 ms. Perhaps in the future a prescaler might be required,
> but
> this whole thing is just really chrome anyway.
> 
> Would anyone scream and projectile-vomit if I added this to identcpu.c?
> 
> 



To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.3.95.990902111506.3714C-100000>