site_archiver@lists.apple.com Delivered-To: darwin-kernel@lists.apple.com Hey Andrew Best regards, Stauff__ On Aug 27, 2007, at 4:58 PM, Andrew Gallatin wrote: Ah, one of my pet peeves :) At least part of the reason for this is the decision to use a 32-bit kernel with a 4GB address space rather than a 64-bit kernel on 64-bit hardware. Every syscall to the kernel takes a bit longer because copying the syscall arguments is no longer just a simple bcopy with a fault handler. This is because, unlike on most other *nixes, the kernel and the application don't share an address space. I'm pointing my finger at this because I've seen similar slowdowns running 32-bit linux with the 4G/4G kernel/user address space patch applied. _______________________________________________ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Darwin-kernel mailing list (Darwin-kernel@lists.apple.com) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/darwin-kernel/site_archiver%40lists.a... Thanks for quite a complete answer! Btw speaking about 32-bit kernel - will Leopard feature a full 64-bit kernel? From what I've heard this seems to be the case. Hope things will improve then a bit. Platon Fomichev writes: As another side-note I am constantly in question why does ./configure like scripts take an exceptionally big amount of time on even most powerful Mac Pro's compared to FreeBSD? Is this related to fork()/ exec () or sh port itself or something else? Anyone ever did some research on this? Drew This email sent to site_archiver@lists.apple.com