| To: | linux-mips@fnet.fr |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: FYI (part II) |
| From: | Warner Losh <imp@harmony.village.org> |
| Date: | Thu, 25 Feb 1999 01:09:13 -0700 |
| Cc: | K.H.C.vanHouten@research.kpn.com |
| In-reply-to: | Your message of "Wed, 24 Feb 1999 09:54:06 +0100." <199902240854.JAA08376@sparta.research.kpn.com> |
| References: | <199902240854.JAA08376@sparta.research.kpn.com> |
In message <199902240854.JAA08376@sparta.research.kpn.com> "Houten K.H.C. van (Karel)" writes: : NetBSD : Linux : : As you can see, the bonnie results show clearly that the currect SCSI driver : uses a lot CPU, but I assume that will improve in the future. Keep in mind that the NetBSD code you are comparing against uses a really ancient version of their scsi code. It is slow, even by their standards... I find it interesting that all of the Byte tests were faster on NetBSD, however. Odd, no? Warner |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: FYI (part II), Thomas Bogendoerfer |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | mail change notification, pvallino |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: FYI (part II), Thomas Bogendoerfer |
| Next by Thread: | Re: FYI (part II), ralf |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |