Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2000 11:42:25 -0400 (EDT) From: Kenneth Wayne Culver <culverk@wam.umd.edu> To: Nate Williams <nate@yogotech.com> Cc: Bill Fumerola <billf@chc-chimes.com>, "Daniel O'Connor" <doconnor@gsoft.com.au>, "Daniel C. Sobral" <dcs@newsguy.com>, cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG, cvs-committers@FreeBSD.ORG, Alfred Perlstein <alfred@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/kern uipc_socket.c uipc_socket2.c src/sy Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.21.0006161140230.17418-100000@rac1.wam.umd.edu> In-Reply-To: <200006161531.JAA00677@nomad.yogotech.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > > Correct. If we want performance, how about removing the difference > > > between kernel and userland. Why have the overhead of the kernel > > > vs. userland change, since it causes us to take a big performance hit. > > > > > > As long as we're at it, we may as well embed all of the video drivers in > > > the kernel, like NT did. X should become an embedded part of the > > > system, since that will also speed up performance again. > > > > > > There are *LOTS* of performance improvments that can be done. Since > > > FreeBSD is used on the internet, let's embed telnet and ftp in the > > > kernel as well. We could certainly blow away all benchmarks that people > > > see. > > > > So basically if you don't have any constructive to contribute to the > > specific case at hand, you can just make broad assinine statements? > > No. I'm saying that blowing your architecture for performance gains > isn't worth it. If performance is your entire goal (as you stated), > there are lots of ways of removing that bottleneck. > > In short, the removal of the userland/kernel switch would make the > original code's reason for existence gone, since the context switch is > so painful. > > Or, will you agree that architecture and consistency has a role in > FreeBSD, and that sometimes performance must take a back seat? > > I know I have no say in this... but as an interested party watching the discussion, I think that certain architectural changes can be made in the intrests of performance as long as the OS remains either as stable as before ... or more stable.. ================================================================= | Kenneth Culver | FreeBSD: The best NT upgrade | | Unix Systems Administrator | ICQ #: 24767726 | | and student at The | AIM: muythaibxr | | The University of Maryland, | Website: (Under Construction) | | College Park. | http://www.wam.umd.edu/~culverk/| ================================================================= To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.GSO.4.21.0006161140230.17418-100000>