Re: 2.2.18Pre Lan Performance Rocks!

Jeff V. Merkey
2000-10-31T22:57:52Z

Larry McVoy wrote:
>
> On Tue, Oct 31, 2000 at 03:38:00PM -0700, Jeff V. Merkey wrote:
> > Larry McVoy wrote:
> > > On Tue, Oct 31, 2000 at 03:15:37PM -0700, Jeff V. Merkey wrote:
> > > > The quality of the networking code in Linux is quite excellent. There's
> > > > some scaling problems relative to NetWare. We are firmly committed to
> > > > getting something out with a Linux code base and NetWare metrics. Love
> > > > to have your help.
> > >
> > > Jeff, I'm a little concerned with some of your statements. Netware may
> > > be the greatest thing since sliced bread, but it isn't a full operating
> > > system, so comparing it to Linux is sort of meaningless.
> >
> > It's makes more money in a week than Linux has ever made.
>
> And the relevance of that to this conversation is exactly what?
>
> > A context switch in anoperating system context in it's simplest for is
> >
> > mov x, esp
> > mov esp, y
> >
> > > and you can support all that and get user to user context switches in a
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> > Apology accepted.
>
> No apology was extended.

hipocrite.

You're spouting nonsense. User to user means
> process A in VM 1 switching to process B in VM 2. I'm sorry, Mr Merkey,
> but a
>
> mov x, esp
> mov esp, y
>
> doesn't begin to approach a user to user context switch. Please go learn
> what a user to user context switch is. Then come back when you can do
> one of those in a few cycles.

You have angry fingers (one of my problems). You don't need a user
context switch for kernel paths in a NOS kernel. In NetWare, user
context switches are done in gates in the GDT with TSS descriptors, not
in kernel fast paths with LAN I/O, which isn't what I was talking about.

Jeff

> --
> ---
> Larry McVoy lm at bitmover.com http://www.bitmover.com/lm