Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2000 16:33:36 -0800 From: Mike Smith <msmith@freebsd.org> To: Matthew Dillon <dillon@apollo.backplane.com> Cc: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: SMP buildworld times / performance tests Message-ID: <200003300033.QAA07919@mass.cdrom.com> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 29 Mar 2000 15:01:36 PST." <200003292301.PAA65915@apollo.backplane.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> For the single-process (1-fork) case, syscall overhead improved > moderately from 1.6 uS in 4.0 to 1.3 uS in 5.0. I think the marked > improvement in the competing-cpu's case is due to the movement of the > MP lock inward somewhat (even for syscalls that aren't MP safe), > the removal of a considerable number of unnecessary 'lock'ed instructions, > and the removal of the cpl lock (which benefits spl*() code as well as > syscall/interrupt code). > > I got similar results for calling sigprocmask(): You should be able to remove the splhigh() from sigprocmask and run it MPSAFE. At least, I can't find a reason not to (and it works here, yes). -- \\ Give a man a fish, and you feed him for a day. \\ Mike Smith \\ Tell him he should learn how to fish himself, \\ msmith@freebsd.org \\ and he'll hate you for a lifetime. \\ msmith@cdrom.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200003300033.QAA07919>