> His point was not a claim about performance, rather he was bringing into > question whether performance was improving with successive releases. Bringing something into question without detail is useless. If I seriously questioned your sexual orientation, for example, you'd have every right to ask me just what the hell I was basing such a question on and why I was uncertain about it in the first place. Dennis has no less of an obligation to define his terms and not simply wave his hands. And besides, you need to read his message again - he DID make a claim about performance, he said it was slower than 2.2.x. That by itself, unfortunately, means precisely nothing. - Jordan To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
- Re: PCI DMA lockups in 3.2 (3.... Eivind Eklund
- Re: PCI DMA lockups in 3.2 (3.... Ben Rosengart
- Re: PCI DMA lockups in 3.2 (3.... Karl Denninger
- Re: PCI DMA lockups in 3.2 (3.... Matthew Dillon
- Re: PCI DMA lockups in 3.2 (3.... Karl Denninger
- Re: PCI DMA lockups in 3.2 (3.... Bill Fumerola
- Re: PCI DMA lockups in 3.2 (3.... Mike Smith
- Re: PCI DMA lockups in 3.2 (3.... Matthew Dillon
- Re: PCI DMA lockups in 3.2 (3.... Mike Smith
- Re: PCI DMA lockups in 3.2 (3.... Matthew Dillon
- Re: PCI DMA lockups in 3.2 (3.... Jordan K. Hubbard
- Re: PCI DMA lockups in 3.2 (3.... Ben Rosengart
- Re: PCI DMA lockups in 3.2 (3.... Warner Losh
- Re: PCI DMA lockups in 3.2 (3.3 maybe?) Mike Smith
- Re: PCI DMA lockups in 3.2 (3.3 maybe?) Dennis
- Re: PCI DMA lockups in 3.2 (3.3 ma... Wes Peters
- Re: PCI DMA lockups in 3.2 (3.3 maybe?) Bjorn Danielsson