Re: Progress on scaling of FreeBSD on 8 CPU systems

Kris Kennaway wrote:

Hopefully within a week or two. It might not be that exact patch, I
think John wants to try and do it a bit differently instead of
introducing a new locking primitive just for this.

Well why not? :) I am not an expert, but reading jeffr's posts it looks
like the idea of sleepable mutexes was taken from Solaris, where it's
also not exactly documented. If moving away from sleepable mutexes
introduces more than a small single digit percentage drop in performance
(1% on multi-gigahertz machines is a lot), why not keep it? If it's
dangerous to use, that should be documented in the man page with big
bold letters but if it helps, keep it.

(Of course I might be completely off the track and sleepable mutexes
might be inconsequential for performance here :) )

_______________________________________________
freebsd-current@xxxxxxxxxxx mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxx"