From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Sun May 25 12:17:24 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5A2E237B401 for ; Sun, 25 May 2003 12:17:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from prg.traveller.cz (prg.traveller.cz [193.85.2.77]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DA72C43F93 for ; Sun, 25 May 2003 12:17:22 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from mime@traveller.cz) Received: from prg.traveller.cz (localhost [127.0.0.1]) h4PJHIJG069078; Sun, 25 May 2003 21:17:18 +0200 (CEST) Received: from localhost (mime@localhost)id h4PJHI88069074; Sun, 25 May 2003 21:17:18 +0200 (CEST) Date: Sun, 25 May 2003 21:17:18 +0200 (CEST) From: Michal Mertl To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Message-ID: <20030525211150.S67784@prg.traveller.cz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: Re: 4GB limit with netstat X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 25 May 2003 19:17:24 -0000 > I've forgotten the orginaly discussion last year - just how expensive > is it again to do a locked 64bit update on x86? If it is less than say > 8x the time to do a 32bit increment, then we should probably just bite > the bullet and do it for the few counters where it makes sense (input > and output bytes and packets). The price for locked 64bit update was really high. I can't find my measurements from that time, but it was more on the scale of 100 times more expensive. -- Michal Mertl mime@traveller.cz