Re: [9fans] interesting timing tests

[Richard Miller]

> in any event, i was suspecting that ilock
> would be a big loser as nproc goes up, and it does appear to
> be.

Spin locks would have been high on my list of suspects.

> i'm less sure that runproc is really using 62% of the cpu

Not impossible, given this:

Proc*
runproc(void)
{
                ...
                /* waste time or halt the CPU */
                idlehands();
                ...

and this:

void
idlehands(void)
{
        if(conf.nmach == 1)
                halt();
}