On 08-Oct-01 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > In doing some kernel profiling analysis it seems that splx is taking up big > chunks of time.
That's becaause splx() can result in interrupts blocked during an spl() getting a chance to run, including soft interrrupts such as softclock and the network software interrupts. Note that splx itself is quick, it is the releasing of interrupts which is expensive, which will only happen on the "outside" splx() if you have nested spl's. > The mbuf macros call splimp()..splx() explicitly..are they required at > interrupt time? Is there a higher performance way of protecting the necessary > code? Not really. > B -- John Baldwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -- http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/ PGP Key: http://www.baldwin.cx/~john/pgpkey.asc "Power Users Use the Power to Serve!" - http://www.FreeBSD.org/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
