Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2003 20:31:55 -0400 (AST) From: "Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy@hub.org> To: David Schultz <das@FreeBSD.ORG> Cc: Wes Peters <wes@softweyr.com>, Vallo Kallaste <kalts@estpak.ee>, freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: "leak" in softupdates? Message-ID: <20030307203014.D66674@hub.org> In-Reply-To: <20030307214306.GB63881@HAL9000.homeunix.com> References: <20030305204526.T38115@hub.org> <20030307101718.GA1908@kevad.internal> <20030307081643.B15693@hub.org> <200303070648.26984.wes@softweyr.com> <20030307152045.P18433@hub.org> <20030307214306.GB63881@HAL9000.homeunix.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, 7 Mar 2003, David Schultz wrote: > Thus spake Marc G. Fournier <scrappy@hub.org>: > > > Being worked on. Not so hard to do, much harder to do right. Guess who > > > took the easy sleazy path? ;^) The other good news is that the intel > > > network cards, both 10/100 (fxp) and 10/100/1000 (em) support 64-bit > > > addressing, even in 32-bit PCI slots, so you'll have at least ONE enet > > > interface that'll work reasonably fast. > > > > Yes, I don't recall who it was that explained it to me (Terry, maybe?), > > but I understand the problem with going above 4gig under ia32, and was > > personally just sitting back and waiting for Intel to go full steam ahead > > on the ia64 stuff ... but they just sacked it :( Man, did that ever throw > > a shiver up my back ... > > It's amazing how many times bank switching has been reinvented, eh? Just curious here, but with the speed of CPUs nowadays, how much impact would bank switching have on performance? To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030307203014.D66674>