Re: icky performance tweaks (was Re: Benchmarks)

From: Shane Kerr (shane@time-travellers.org)
Date: Mon Apr 16 2001 - 03:04:34 PDT

  • Next message: Karim Yaghmour: "Re: icky performance tweaks (was Re: Benchmarks)"

    On 2001-04-16 00:49:55 +0000, Karim Yaghmour wrote:
    > 
    > May I point out that "should be" is different from "can be" and I'm
    > afraid you'll find it hard to reach the 0.1% mark unless you resort to
    > self-modifying code.
    
    Huh?  On modern CPU's, self-modifying code is a huge performance killer.
    Which is good, because it's also a nightmare to maintain.  I think this,
    along with the bitmask idea, can be safely sent to /dev/null.  Certainly
    nobody is going to stop anyone who wants to play around with performance
    tweaks like this, but I hate to see anyone waste a lot of time on
    techniques that won't work.  :(
    
    Shane
    
    
    _______________________________________________
    linux-security-module mailing list
    linux-security-moduleat_private
    http://mail.wirex.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-security-module
    



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon Apr 16 2001 - 03:05:41 PDT