Re: Network Stack Locking

From: Peter Jeremy (PeterJeremy_at_optushome.com.au)
Date: 05/21/04

  • Next message: Garance A Drosihn: "Re: Move /usr/sup to /var/db/sup?" 
    Date: Sat, 22 May 2004 07:32:08 +1000
To: Andre Oppermann <andre@freebsd.org>

    On Thu, 2004-May-20 23:32:53 +0200, Andre Oppermann wrote:
    >Robert Watson wrote:
    >...
    >> Note that there are some serious issues with the current locking changes:
    >...
    >>
    >
    >I vote for the approach to get in as much as possible from the moment
    >on it is known to work *correctly* (not neccessarily perfectly optimal/
    >optimized). Having something correct is an ideal base to start for
    >optimizing. There I'm ready to jump in and go ahead to make things
    >better by re-arraning or re-writing them.

    Keep in mind that the best improvements in performance are achieved by
    using a better algorithm - macro-optimisation rather than micro-
    optimisation. We currently have a network stack that works correctly
    and should be careful about committing WIP code that may be heading in
    the wrong direction.

    >Progress happens incrementally. Put in Green's kqueue locking, have
    >that working correctly and make it perfect in a second step.

    I don't believe this is the correct approach at this time. Brian's
    code removes functionality that people have stated that they _do_ use.
    In theory, John-Mark's approach offers better performance without the
    loss of functionality. Before implementing Brian's code, the Project
    needs to decide which direction it should move in. 

    -- 
Peter Jeremy
_______________________________________________
freebsd-arch@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arch
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-arch-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
  • Next message: Garance A Drosihn: "Re: Move /usr/sup to /var/db/sup?"