hyper threading.

[em1897 at aol.com]

Things have changed a bit since then, so I doubt that
"proof" has any relevance. All polling does , in the context
of device polling, is make networking low-priority. You are
adding latency to save CPU cycles. You could argue that
higher latency is lower performance. Interrupt hold offs
are a much better way to reduce interrupts without
poisoning your system with extra overhead.


-----Original Message-----
From: Anthony Atkielski <atkielski.anthony at wanadoo.fr>
To: freebsd-questions at freebsd.org
Sent: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 16:49:20 +0200
Subject: Re: hyper threading.

Boris Spirialitious writes:

> If you understood what I said, then you wouldn't
> say what you said, because its just plain wrong.

I've written code that proves it right.  Someone once told me that a
80286 couldn't handle ordinary terminal communications at speeds of
38400 bps.  I proved that it could, but the comm program I wrote to do
so used polling rather than interrupts to accomplish it.  It was
impossible to handle such high speeds with interrupt-driven I/O.

--
Anthony


_______________________________________________
freebsd-questions at freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to 
"freebsd-questions-unsubscribe at freebsd.org"