40% slowdown with dynamic /bin/sh

Matthew Dillon dillon at apollo.backplane.com
Tue Nov 25 01:23:51 PST 2003

:5.x and propaganda about DFBSD doesn't really mean a whole lot, unless you
:are looking for new recruits to your camp.  In any case, you've made your
:point on a nearly daily basis that 5.x is inferior to what DFBSD will be,
:and that you don't have much knowledge or care about 5.x anyways.  So
:please, go do what you do best and make DFBSD the envy of the BSD world.
:I'll be first in line to pat you on the back when you succeed.

    Hmm.  Well, I think there's some confusion here.  While I certainly
    like my vision for DFly better then I like the vision for FreeBSD-5,
    that is simply in the eye of the beholder... of course I am going
    to like my own vision better.  It's my vision, after all!  Your
    vision is obviously different.  In fact, I expect that each person
    has his own vision for the project, so don't knock me for mine.

    But that has nothing to do with perceived inferiority or superiority.
    The issue isn't so much whether one project is better then the other
    as it is whether one is able and willing to borrow a proven concept
    from another project to replace the one that maybe isn't so hot in
    one's own.   As it happens, I have borrowed quite a bit of code
    from 5.x.  As it also happens, I believe that 5.x would benefit by
    adopting some of the things that have already been proven to work
    quite well in DragonFly.  For example, using a statistical time 
    accumulation model instead of calling microtime() in the middle
    of the critical thread switch path, or not preemptively switching
    threads operating in kernelland to another cpu, or the implementation
    of a mutexless scheduler.  Just a few examples.  I can only point out
    the concepts and ideas and point to the code in DFly, it is up to
    FreeBSD-5 developers to take the ball up and either throw it away or
    run with it. 

    I have not been posting daily, but you seem to be frustrated about
    something.  I can only suggest that blaming me for your frustrations
    is not going to solve any tangible, technical issue in FreeBSD-5.  My
    posts are technical and to the point.  Just because it's coming out of
    my mouth rather then someone you might respect a bit more doesn't 
    make it any more or less valid.  If you cannot address them based
    on their technical merit then you've missed the point of the post

    And, just for the record, I feel quite obligated to try to move
    the FreeBSD project forward along a path that I believe will be more
    beneficial to its users.  Just to be clear:  My obligation is to all
    the people who use FreeBSD, not to the feelings of particular
    developers whos vision(s) I might disagree with.  I have no intent or
    intention of screwing over FreeBSD (how absurd!) but you should not
    mistakenly equate that to me being accomodating to FreeBSD's current
    vision which, yes! it is true! I have serious disagreements with.
    Over the years I have recommended FreeBSD to hundreds of people and
    I take that responsibility very seriously.

    If it is within the scope of the FreeBSD charter for a person to
    post based on a perceived obligation to the end users of FreeBSD,
    then I certainly still have a right to post to this group.

					Matthew Dillon 
					<dillon at backplane.com>

More information about the freebsd-current mailing list