Mail Archives: cygwin/1998/02/03/18:16:53
-----Original Message-----
From: marcus AT bighorn DOT dr DOT lucent DOT com <marcus AT bighorn DOT dr DOT lucent DOT com>
To: gnu-win32 AT cygnus DOT com <gnu-win32 AT cygnus DOT com>
Date: 03 February 1998 04:02
Subject: Re: Time and motion studies of gcc and egcs and LCC
>I don't think that the overhead of getting into a DLL is all that great, so
>I think that the performance hit is somewhere else, like inside cygwin.dll
>and NT itself. The cost to enter a DLL is an additional jump instruction
>(indirect through the linkage pointer). To return is no cost. Granted,
this
>does bring an additional page into the working set (or two, actually,
because
>the linkage pointer is probably on a different page), but if the calls are
>frequent, it should not be flushed frequently, so the page fault cost is
>not very great either.
I read that in win95 the pages are flushed in order of first-in-first-out,
and if a flushed page is a commonly used page, it will just be first-in
again a bit quicker, and all this to save on the overheads of working out
which pages are least used.
I was shocked when I read it too, but imagine the overheads of doing page
usage sorting every time you need to load a new page? MS seemed to think
little was gained.
Sam Liddicott | Nothing I say is to be attributed as |
Campbell Scientific Ltd. | a company statement or representation. |
Campbell Park, 80 Hathern Road, *----------------------------------------+
Shepshed, Leic. United Kingdom. LE12 9AL Phone: +44 (0) 1509 601141
Email: sam AT campbellsci DOT co DOT uk Fax: +44 (0) 1509 601091
-
For help on using this list (especially unsubscribing), send a message to
"gnu-win32-request AT cygnus DOT com" with one line of text: "help".
- Raw text -