here's the raw data from a seperate run, and slightly different code,
and a different machine.
this is a test with thread(2) channels with T tx procs × R rx procs:
; aux/cpuid -i
Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E31230 @ 3.20GHz
; wc -l /dev/sysstat
8 /dev/sysstat
; for(i in 1 2 4 8 16)time 6
> On 22 September 2013 03:55, erik quanstrom wrote:
>
> >
> > new 1.55e10 O=10M=8
> > old 2.74e10
> >
> > new 3.64e10 O=0 M=8
> > old 5.14e10
> >
> > am i doing something fundamental wrong, or are the new locks substantially
On 22 September 2013 03:55, erik quanstrom wrote:
>
> new 1.55e10 O=10M=8
> old 2.74e10
>
> new 3.64e10 O=0 M=8
> old 5.14e10
>
> am i doing something fundamental wrong, or are the new locks substantially
> slower than the ol
http://davidrhoskin.com/gsoc/2013/img/
- erik
> you are missing the reason. read the paper.
the paper in question one assumes is "Semaphores in Plan 9",
Sape Mullender and Russ Cox, IWP9, 2008.
the idea in the paper is the scheduler might hurt, but i don't think
there's any real development of that idea. so it's also possible that
the sched
I recently acquired another pi and found it wouldn't boot with any of
my existing sd cards. It seems there has been a hardware change at
some point (new RAM chip?) which requires a new version of the
firmware which runs on the Broadcom GPU.
I've updated the dos partition of the sd card image in /
