From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: tuhs-bounces@minnie.tuhs.org X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.1 (2015-04-28) on inbox.vuxu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.0 required=5.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,HTML_MESSAGE,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,T_DKIMWL_WL_MED autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.1 Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (minnie.tuhs.org [45.79.103.53]) by inbox.vuxu.org (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTP id 8b2ff199 for ; Sat, 1 Sep 2018 19:08:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id 0DADEA207C; Sun, 2 Sep 2018 05:08:17 +1000 (AEST) Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0F136A1A8F; Sun, 2 Sep 2018 05:08:03 +1000 (AEST) Authentication-Results: minnie.tuhs.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=bsdimp-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com header.i=@bsdimp-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com header.b=JZX9g4WE; dkim-atps=neutral Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id 3E975A1A6D; Sun, 2 Sep 2018 05:08:00 +1000 (AEST) Received: from mail-it0-f53.google.com (mail-it0-f53.google.com [209.85.214.53]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A4D9BA1A20 for ; Sun, 2 Sep 2018 05:07:57 +1000 (AEST) Received: by mail-it0-f53.google.com with SMTP id h1-v6so11132846itj.4 for ; Sat, 01 Sep 2018 12:07:57 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=bsdimp-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=KUodRav3qmPeqJbxDxfT180NNI0aCg6/OBu2tdQTRpc=; b=JZX9g4WEETf1EwKof4Ie3Bd2Yf/vXZQlqP/t8ipWUZnuY6rM0WLqslIarQ1J50al8G rNr2l273aIuPrQO4fKI73jDJfFq+OFvx4Jm5OjKMm/kRmW137rXpav99Q+07z7Ys5xUY A7JLiTjoq2/GooTXYFtsB66aMKYhtIEKhb5+5gKFaVkpc3swXkNl4A3TzQwr0mCoH+JV KiC29eaLczJOPjUVOMjfPPA73m+Cr5SXXafAuO4Ey9VYU730P6F3mjYmX22wpJ11Boc7 /Q6RBQrOVm+2BVqFU2IVjsztIBZKguN7di/sDlUSTtfihQlSkZOzRrHkHspu94j/R948 tEAA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=KUodRav3qmPeqJbxDxfT180NNI0aCg6/OBu2tdQTRpc=; b=gLfhldrWLMWSiswRhd6Xite9RXAGedQnv7zLd5Ds7nI4k4bes19H09GhNCkrKZX+eE yy7E9j9xM0s8Cm8E5Scc0KL0ulHFPDhWp9WgOdU/ZhtQERc354fLHh3zKbBH3khm+0co S9ab0Nv4Fp28tldT+JzZxRf1ibxMPiqkRSOT7WRY2BKrzjVui8fQCG4A4ajN8p3tAbLv bQkflIimUWR3R+XAipwE7ysfLSvApBaE3CCtYGUCoq+URQbl4SQ6Ut0RJhH2wS+WxKw0 Ky1UMjshE7sp3E/SfaAQ0qDQ194fzJcZIS9LFeri3vHtJdTQHk0jW7aSt9f2JM0yjlgU w+vg== X-Gm-Message-State: APzg51Br5UDo3ZkYA7fsmg6enAep/8PVTrzTab/1Az8a6E345VxqGXmi a/tn1m+jfHg4JUDTy/+N5l4Mr0ymbnrkRzGHOwupphftYm8= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ANB0VdbjzLaWGK9WiXC2RI0Ltw3q6rOZ3nX1NQqwiutqFYlF4i47uIUdKmShq7u2M5FHIIDvXOCgx1gLjRbzGKeexV4= X-Received: by 2002:a02:3344:: with SMTP id k4-v6mr16346070jak.45.1535828876924; Sat, 01 Sep 2018 12:07:56 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20180901185053.GA20993@mcvoy.com> In-Reply-To: <20180901185053.GA20993@mcvoy.com> From: Warner Losh Date: Sat, 1 Sep 2018 13:07:45 -0600 Message-ID: To: Larry McVoy Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000a532c60574d406d4" Subject: Re: [TUHS] UVM VM system X-BeenThere: tuhs@minnie.tuhs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: The Unix Heritage Society mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: TUHS main list Errors-To: tuhs-bounces@minnie.tuhs.org Sender: "TUHS" --000000000000a532c60574d406d4 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" On Sat, Sep 1, 2018 at 12:51 PM Larry McVoy wrote: > So I just read this > > https://www.usenix.org/legacy/event/usenix99/full_papers/cranor/cranor.pdf > > and it looks encouraging. Apparently NetBSD is using it. Does anyone > know if they are happy with it? > They are relatively happy with it... > Has FreeBSD considered this? > Yes, but it would be a huge porting effort. > Has anyone benchmarked FreeBSD against NetBSD to see which is faster > for VM stuff? > Generally, the benchmarks favor FreeBSD. Again, it's a cleaner design, but the time spent optimizing FreeBSD's and eliminating the bottle necks has paid off... Warner --000000000000a532c60574d406d4 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


On Sat= , Sep 1, 2018 at 12:51 PM Larry McVoy <l= m@mcvoy.com> wrote:
So I jus= t read this

https://www.usenix.org/leg= acy/event/usenix99/full_papers/cranor/cranor.pdf

and it looks encouraging.=C2=A0 Apparently NetBSD is using it.=C2=A0 Does a= nyone
know if they are happy with it?

They ar= e relatively happy with it...=C2=A0
=C2=A0
Has FreeBSD considered this?

Yes, but i= t would be a huge porting effort.
=C2=A0
Has anyone benchmarked FreeBSD against NetBSD to see which is faster
for VM stuff?

Generally, the benchmarks= favor FreeBSD. Again, it's a cleaner design, but the time spent optimi= zing FreeBSD's and eliminating the bottle necks has paid off...

Warner
--000000000000a532c60574d406d4--