Hi hi Chris!,

On Thu, 8 Feb 2001, Chris Gilbert wrote:
> I've just been playing with my kinetic card, I've made the kernel not use any 
> of the on board ram (note it corrupts the console cursor)
> 
> Anyway the test was how long it takes to do make configure for gmake 
> (configure scripts hammer the pmap rather badly on rpc)
> 
> pkgsrc and obj dir's mounted off remote machine.  reboot done between, and 
> make clean also done so both worked off freshly extracted and patched source. 
> Test conditions were near identical as I can do at near midnight :)

:(( that's not a good sign ... the main bottle neck is now the networkcard
.... have you tried a memory disc? that would REALLY show :)) I know you
cant use the harddisc with this hack which is pretty bad :(

> Anyway figures are:
> 	with onboard ram	kinetic only		%
> real		293.22		204.40			70
> user		29.99		21.37			71.3
> sys		225.60		151.14			67
> 
> So it looks like there's a boost to be had from the kinetic :)

Hehe... yeah well its less than i anticipated i must admit but looking at
the remote network stuff it doenst suprise me though ... it cripples these
figures.

> If anyone wants a copy of the kernel shout up, and I'll upload one, oh it's 
> based of -current (note that the diff isn't ready for the real world, it's a 
> HACK, if looks for any memory blocks that aren't kinetic ram and shuffles the 
> dram blocks down in the bootconfig)

*grin* well the diffs would be interesting to see *grin* ... i'll have a
look at the move tomorrow for even if its a 140% speed its good :)

> Tommorrow I plan to compare this to the new bootloader (it makes things feel 
> slower, but I want something more substantial than just a feeling ;)

Wierd.... i for some reason notice a speed increase! ... esp. on the
screen .... hmmm.... wierd.

Cheers,
Reinoud