I'd like to suggest that you use the same bit-width for 'Dummy' as that for
'count', and initialize it to 0, so as to ensure that it won't overflow.
-Robby
On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 1:52 PM, Slawa Olhovchenkov wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 29, 2011 at 07:52:11AM +1100, Bruce Evans wrote:
>
> > >> there ar
On Sat, Jan 29, 2011 at 11:54:11PM +1100, Bruce Evans wrote:
> >> So FreeBSD has about 18% more network overhead (absolute: 65-47), or
> >> about 38% more network overhead (relative: (65-47)/47). Not too
> >> surprising -- the context switches alone might cost that.
> >
> > For only 14K vs 56K in
On Sat, 29 Jan 2011, Slawa Olhovchenkov wrote:
On Sat, Jan 29, 2011 at 02:43:07PM +1100, Bruce Evans wrote:
On Sat, 29 Jan 2011, Slawa Olhovchenkov wrote:
On Sat, Jan 29, 2011 at 07:52:11AM +1100, Bruce Evans wrote:
To see how much CPU is actually available, run something else and see how
On Sat, Jan 29, 2011 at 02:43:07PM +1100, Bruce Evans wrote:
> On Sat, 29 Jan 2011, Slawa Olhovchenkov wrote:
>
> > On Sat, Jan 29, 2011 at 07:52:11AM +1100, Bruce Evans wrote:
> >>
> >> To see how much CPU is actually available, run something else and see how
> >> fast it runs. A simple countin
