< said:
> Well, some difference is to be expected. But 22%
Flaws in the Intel SMP design make it more expensive than it ought to
be. Things like atomic RMW cycles are very, very expensive. (We had
a discussion about six months ago about how expensive something like a
locked xchg instruct
>
> Yes it should. SMP support enables inter-processor locking code which
> does not exist in non-SMP kernels. Ergo, non-SMP kernels run
> uniprocessor tasks faster.
>
Well, some difference is to be expected. But 22%
- Mohit
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "un
[Not network-related; moved to -current.]
< said:
> Good Lord! This is the second time now. I even SAID in my last two mails that
> there is only ONE processor. Theortically then, FreeBSD configured with/without
> SMP support shouldn't make any difference.
Yes it should. SMP support enables in
