Messages in this thread | | | From | Roman Gollent <> | Subject | Re: Macintosh kernel out | Date | Tue, 21 May 1996 16:36:13 -0400 (EDT) |
| |
David S. Miller wrote:
> Besides a real native port would be much faster. ;)
So where does QNX fit into this scheme? It's certainly not a monolithic kernel (ie: It has a 10kbyte microkernel). And for what it's worth, I looked at their web page:
http://www.qnx.com/product/perform.html
---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Performance Profile*
Context switching: 5 microseconds (full, user-level switch) Interrupt latency: 7 microseconds Disk I/O: 2.8 Mbytes/second Network throughput: 1.0 Mbytes/second Serial I/O: 115 Kbaud
* Measured on a 66 MHz 486DX2 with a Buslogic BT-445S SCSI controller, Maxtor MXT-1240S disk drive, and NE2000 Ethernet card.
Interrupt and process latency (times in microseconds)
Interrupt Context Processor latency* switch ------------ --------- ------- 60 Mhz Pentium 4 5 66 Mhz 486 6 5 33 Mhz 486 8 12 33 Mhz 386 11 30 16 Mhz 386SX 32 90 8 Mhz 286 65 175
With nested interrupts, these interrupt latencies represent the worst-case latency for the highest priority interrupt. Interrupt priority is user-definable and the interrupt latency for lower-priority interrupt sources is defined by the user's application-specific interrupt handlers. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'd be a little reluctant to write off a design simply because it's a microkernel. Granted, MACH isn't renowned for it's blinding speed. ;-)
Roman
| |