Hi, re this from Alec Kloss, 21 Jan 2008:
> I'm hoping someone will be able to help me out with the audio is
> the Geode CS5536. This has come up a few times before, once early
> this month and once last February. The CS5530 driver mentioned on
> the soundsystem wiki doesn't work.
>
> ..
Kris Kennaway wrote:
Stefan Lambrev wrote:
How much can Linux handle?
Will install ubuntu on the same machine and let you know, but my
experience shows that FreeBSD + TSC
have the same performance as Linux
With which timecounter?
I guess the default as it is not set anywhere (in linux it c
Stefan Lambrev wrote:
Kris Kennaway wrote:
Stefan Lambrev wrote:
You should use hwpmc to verify where the application is really
spending time, since gettimeofday doesn't seem to account for it all.
pmc: Unknown Intel CPU.
module_register_init: MOD_LOAD (hwpmc, 0x8029906d,
0x
Kris Kennaway wrote:
Stefan Lambrev wrote:
You should use hwpmc to verify where the application is really
spending time, since gettimeofday doesn't seem to account for it all.
pmc: Unknown Intel CPU.
module_register_init: MOD_LOAD (hwpmc, 0x8029906d,
0x8054c500) error 78
OK
Stefan Lambrev wrote:
How much can Linux handle?
Will install ubuntu on the same machine and let you know, but my
experience shows that FreeBSD + TSC
have the same performance as Linux
With which timecounter?
Here are the max speeds I can reach with different counters (on the test
server):
Hi,
Ivan Voras wrote:
Stefan Lambrev wrote:
I do not have HEPT on the servers that I test, but simple test on my
laptop shows
that hping can generate with ACPI-fast ~4MB/s traffic, 5MB/s with HPET
and 8MB/s with TSC.
How much can Linux handle?
Will install ubuntu on the same machine and le
Stefan Lambrev wrote:
You should use hwpmc to verify where the application is really
spending time, since gettimeofday doesn't seem to account for it all.
pmc: Unknown Intel CPU.
module_register_init: MOD_LOAD (hwpmc, 0x8029906d,
0x8054c500) error 78
OK, this is the famous pr
Greetings,
Kris Kennaway wrote:
Stefan Lambrev wrote:
Hi,
Dag-Erling Smørgrav wrote:
Stefan Lambrev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
I tested all different combination. The performance change is almost
invisible (100-200KB/s), and can't be compared with the performance
boost that TSC gain over
Stefan Lambrev wrote:
I do not have HEPT on the servers that I test, but simple test on my
laptop shows
that hping can generate with ACPI-fast ~4MB/s traffic, 5MB/s with HPET
and 8MB/s with TSC.
How much can Linux handle?
>I didn't check dummy time counter.
If you do, it would give a nice
Stefan Lambrev wrote:
Hi,
Dag-Erling Smørgrav wrote:
Stefan Lambrev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
I tested all different combination. The performance change is almost
invisible (100-200KB/s), and can't be compared with the performance
boost that TSC gain over ACPI-fast timecounter. Unfortunat
Hi,
Dag-Erling Smørgrav wrote:
Stefan Lambrev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
I tested all different combination. The performance change is almost
invisible (100-200KB/s), and can't be compared with the performance
boost that TSC gain over ACPI-fast timecounter. Unfortunately TSC
doesn't play n
On Tue, Jan 22, 2008 at 03:34:55PM +0100, Dag-Erling Sm?rgrav wrote:
> More modern machines have an HPET timer which is supposedly faster than
> ACPI yet more reliable than TSC.
For NetBSD on AMD64 on a 1.2GHz Core2:
ACPI ~2400 cycles
HPET ~1500 cycles
TSC ~800 cycles
clockinterrupt ~600 cycles
T
Stefan Lambrev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I tested all different combination. The performance change is almost
> invisible (100-200KB/s), and can't be compared with the performance
> boost that TSC gain over ACPI-fast timecounter. Unfortunately TSC
> doesn't play nice with power saving modes.
Daniel Eischen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Not to discount any of your suggestions, but isn't the better
> performance of gettimeofday() (and perhaps clock_gettime() also)
> in Linux because they have access to the time in userland and
> can implement it without a system call? I seem to recall t
Greetings,
Dag-Erling Smørgrav wrote:
Dag-Erling Smørgrav <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Stefan Lambrev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
I tried clock_gettime() (using CLOCK_REALTIME for clock_id), but this
yield worse performance.
Try CLOCK_MONOTONIC instead.
I forgot - there a
On Tue, 22 Jan 2008, Dag-Erling Smørgrav wrote:
Dag-Erling Smørgrav <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Stefan Lambrev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
I tried clock_gettime() (using CLOCK_REALTIME for clock_id), but this
yield worse performance.
Try CLOCK_MONOTONIC instead.
I forgot - there are also th
Dag-Erling Smørgrav <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Stefan Lambrev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > I tried clock_gettime() (using CLOCK_REALTIME for clock_id), but this
> > yield worse performance.
> Try CLOCK_MONOTONIC instead.
I forgot - there are also the FreeBSD-specific CLOCK_REALTIME_FAST and
Stefan Lambrev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I tried clock_gettime() (using CLOCK_REALTIME for clock_id), but this
> yield worse performance.
Try CLOCK_MONOTONIC instead.
DES
--
Dag-Erling Smørgrav - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
___
freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org ma
On 1/22/08, Stefan Lambrev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Greetings,
>
> I noticed that hping3 (from ports) is quite slower when running on
> FreeBSD compared to Linux.
> Simple ktrace shows lot of gettimeofday() calls, so I'm looking for
> replacement of this function.
> I tried clock_gettime() (usi
Greetings,
I noticed that hping3 (from ports) is quite slower when running on
FreeBSD compared to Linux.
Simple ktrace shows lot of gettimeofday() calls, so I'm looking for
replacement of this function.
I tried clock_gettime() (using CLOCK_REALTIME for clock_id), but this
yield worse performan
Cristian, good day.
Mon, Jan 21, 2008 at 11:06:26PM +0200, Cristian KLEIN wrote:
> Eygene Ryabinkin wrote:
>> But what protocol is selected? From your Xorg log I assume that
>> it is either "event", "auto-dev" or not set at all.
>
> I just ran into the same problem. In xorg.conf I explicitly tol
21 matches
Mail list logo
