> On Fri, 27 Mar 1998 10:07:16 -0800 (PST) 
>  Jonathan Stone <jonathan@DSG.Stanford.EDU> wrote:
> 
>  > See
>  > 
>  > http://www.eecis.udel.edu/~ntp/database/html_xntp3-5.90/ldisc.html
>  > 
>  > As I said to Jason in a private email, the numbers for the 100MHz
> 
> ...and as I told you in a private reply to your private mail, those
> numbers have nothing to do with the assertion you were making, which
> was that "FreeBSD's low-level interrupt handing is faster than NetBSD's".

They do have something to do with it, but they don't _prove_ it.

Those numbers provide an upper bound on their interrupt handling time,
at least on that hardware.  You need the interrupt to be delivered to
take the timestamp.


Showing some numbers for FreeBSD and saying that he's never gotten
close to them with any NetBSD system isn't particularly great
argument, but neither is showing no numbers whatsoever and asserting
that NetBSD's performance must be as good.



cgd