Re: Headsup! KSE Nay-sayers speak up!
David O'Brien wrote: On Mon, Aug 27, 2001 at 02:48:21PM -0700, Julian Elischer wrote: I don't WANT to commit without more testing and more support for the other platforms. However I need support from the people DOING those platforms to go further. For $500-$600 I can put you on a 500MHz 21164 Alpha. I've invested $2500 from my own pocket in Alpha hardware, so others with nice Bay Area saleries can too. :-) Remember that Julian is freshly married... Maybe he can be sent an Alpha as a wedding present... -- Terry To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: Headsup! KSE Nay-sayers speak up!
Terry Lambert wrote: David O'Brien wrote: On Mon, Aug 27, 2001 at 02:48:21PM -0700, Julian Elischer wrote: I don't WANT to commit without more testing and more support for the other platforms. However I need support from the people DOING those platforms to go further. For $500-$600 I can put you on a 500MHz 21164 Alpha. I've invested $2500 from my own pocket in Alpha hardware, so others with nice Bay Area saleries can too. :-) Remember that Julian is freshly married... Maybe he can be sent an Alpha as a wedding present... Hey cool down guys... -- Terry -- ++ __ _ __ | __--_|\ Julian Elischer | \ U \/ / hard at work in | / \ [EMAIL PROTECTED] +--x USA\ a very strange | ( OZ)\___ ___ | country ! +- X_.---._/presently in San Francisco \_/ \\ v To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Re: Headsup! KSE Nay-sayers speak up!
Garance A Drosihn wrote: I would very much like to see the KSE work in 5.0, but I still would rather delay that for a later release instead of delaying 5.0 for another three or four months. What about the fact that the KSE work was agreed to be committed if finished in August at the Usenix FreeBSD kernel developement meeting? The schedule was known then, too... -- Terry To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: Headsup! KSE Nay-sayers speak up!
Julian Elischer wrote: I don't WANT to commit without more testing and more support for the other platforms. However I need support from the people DOING those platforms to go further. For $500-$600 I can put you on a 500MHz 21164 Alpha. I've invested $2500 from my own pocket in Alpha hardware, so others with nice Bay Area saleries can too. :-) Remember that Julian is freshly married... Maybe he can be sent an Alpha as a wedding present... Hey cool down guys... ??? He had a :-) and I had a joke in response... I don't think either of us were anything other than joking... ...just in case: 8-). -- Terry To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: Headsup! KSE Nay-sayers speak up!
FreeBSD is going to be left in the dust unless both the SMPng *AND* KSE projects are integrated into 5.0. I care about having a system that works well and does what I ask of it. What the Linux horde is doing is of little concern to me, and I suspect the same goes for a number of other long-time FreeBSDers. Well, I've only been using FreeBSD for 4 or 5 years, and I don't really care what the linux horde is doing, but I would like to see FreeBSD surpass the other x86 OS's in terms of performance as well as uptime Ken To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: Headsup! KSE Nay-sayers speak up!
On Mon, Aug 27, 2001 at 09:34:06AM -0700, John Baldwin wrote: Just to get this out in the public: I for one think 5.x has enough changes in it and would like for KSE to be postponed to 6.0-current and 6.0-release. I I definitely agree about this, 5.x is going to be enough of a major change as it is, and confusing _everything_ with even more big changes can't do any good in the short term, and would probably make KSE (and other things) a big hassle to the point of where they wouldn't be of any use until 6.x anyway. But that's just my opinion, and I'm sure I'll get smacked for it. /joseph To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: Headsup! KSE Nay-sayers speak up!
I have one system that I've been maintaining/updating since the 2.X days and I feel it's time to nuke it and start over. +1 for a non-smp system and SMP system. That said, I think the value of having both KSE and SMPng in 5.0 is HUGE and I think there is probably a large number of people that would be willing to endure kernel panics, dumps, etc. because the value (in terms of technological accomplishment and saleability in the corporate space) would be absolutely worth the bumpy road. -CURRENT isn't worth tracking unless the dumps, bugs, etc are all going toward both SMPng and KSE. Hey, anyone running -current without a tape drive attached with a daily dump schedule is either insane, a masochist, or both. Read my post from this morning about the mysterious filesystem corruption I had this morning... Kudos to Justin Gibbs for fixing EOM detection [let's get his scsi_sa.c patches committed ASAP]!!! Thanks for the heads up! Fortunately I have a few -STABLE systems that I can dump to and that host all of my email/development. ;) I'll probably go and pick up another 40+GB HD just for the extra head-room. If there are grave concerns about having KSE and SMPng in 5.X, then why not push back the release date? The value far outweighs the extra months needed to get it finished and out the door, but what do I know, I'm just a quiet kernel by standard making an observation. -sc Good idea. Seriously, is there any reason to hold to a time line at the expense of some very important and very fundamental enhancements to FreeBSD? I suppose that's something for -core to talk about/discuss, but I bet that if a poll was put on the homepage of FreeBSD.org (hint hint) asking about this, you'd get an overwhelming response to see KSE/SMPng in 5.X. With a poll you might even pick up some more testers given the exposure (hint hint). -sc If it's testers you want, submit a story on slashdot heh heh, I know a lot of BSDers that are converts from linux that want to test stuff, but only read slashdot for their computer news. Ken To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: Headsup! KSE Nay-sayers speak up!
On Tue, 28 Aug 2001, David O'Brien wrote: On Tue, Aug 28, 2001 at 01:17:01AM -0700, Terry Lambert wrote: Julian Elischer wrote: For $500-$600 I can put you on a 500MHz 21164 Alpha. I've invested $2500 from my own pocket in Alpha hardware, so others with nice Bay Area saleries can too. :-) Remember that Julian is freshly married... Maybe he can be sent an Alpha as a wedding present... Hey cool down guys... ??? He had a :-) and I had a joke in response... I don't think either of us were anything other than joking... I don't know why you think that. I was, and am, 110% serious. I'm sure you guys will really endear yourselves to Julian's new wife if you send him a time-consuming new geektoy. ;-) -- Never put off until tomorrow what you can do today. There might be a law against it by that time. -- /usr/games/fortune, 07/30/2001 Brandon D. Valentine bandix at looksharp.net To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: Headsup! KSE Nay-sayers speak up!
David O'Brien wrote: On Tue, Aug 28, 2001 at 01:17:01AM -0700, Terry Lambert wrote: Julian Elischer wrote: For $500-$600 I can put you on a 500MHz 21164 Alpha. I've invested $2500 from my own pocket in Alpha hardware, so others with nice Bay Area saleries can too. :-) Remember that Julian is freshly married... Maybe he can be sent an Alpha as a wedding present... Hey cool down guys... ??? He had a :-) and I had a joke in response... I don't think either of us were anything other than joking... I don't know why you think that. I was, and am, 110% serious. OK. I'll just point out how naieve it is to believe that a newlywed can make a major purchase decision for a toy that will only benefit one partner, and do so through the auspice of having him spend time with it instead of her, and put him in a foul mood, swearing at the little box, while learning a new assembly language for a processor Intel is about to End-Of-Life... 8-) 8-) PS: Peter seems to have done the work anyway, so no matter how serious you were, the objection on behalf of the Alpha is not itself an objection any longer... PPS: Amazing, how much of the grunt work is shouldered by the married Australians arouns here... Cheers, -- Terry To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: Headsup! KSE Nay-sayers speak up!
Joseph Mallett wrote: On Mon, Aug 27, 2001 at 09:34:06AM -0700, John Baldwin wrote: Just to get this out in the public: I for one think 5.x has enough changes in it and would like for KSE to be postponed to 6.0-current and 6.0-release. I I definitely agree about this, 5.x is going to be enough of a major change as it is, and confusing _everything_ with even more big changes can't do any good in the short term, and would probably make KSE (and other things) a big hassle to the point of where they wouldn't be of any use until 6.x anyway. But that's just my opinion, and I'm sure I'll get smacked for it. /joseph *smack* -- ++ __ _ __ | __--_|\ Julian Elischer | \ U \/ / hard at work in | / \ [EMAIL PROTECTED] +--x USA\ a very strange | ( OZ)\___ ___ | country ! +- X_.---._/presently in San Francisco \_/ \\ v To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Re: Headsup! KSE Nay-sayers speak up!
On Tue, Aug 28, 2001 at 09:55:13AM -0700, Julian Elischer wrote: Joseph Mallett wrote: On Mon, Aug 27, 2001 at 09:34:06AM -0700, John Baldwin wrote: Just to get this out in the public: I for one think 5.x has enough changes in it and would like for KSE to be postponed to 6.0-current and 6.0-release. I I definitely agree about this, 5.x is going to be enough of a major change as it is, and confusing _everything_ with even more big changes can't do any good in the short term, and would probably make KSE (and other things) a big hassle to the point of where they wouldn't be of any use until 6.x anyway. But that's just my opinion, and I'm sure I'll get smacked for it. /joseph *smack* Note that I wasn't really posting this comment this late in the thread, but my MTA decided to queue it for an obscenely long time. Sorry. To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: Headsup! KSE Nay-sayers speak up!
On Tue, Aug 28, 2001 at 01:17:01AM -0700, Terry Lambert wrote: Julian Elischer wrote: For $500-$600 I can put you on a 500MHz 21164 Alpha. I've invested $2500 from my own pocket in Alpha hardware, so others with nice Bay Area saleries can too. :-) Remember that Julian is freshly married... Maybe he can be sent an Alpha as a wedding present... Hey cool down guys... ??? He had a :-) and I had a joke in response... I don't think either of us were anything other than joking... I don't know why you think that. I was, and am, 110% serious. -- -- David ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: Headsup! KSE Nay-sayers speak up!
I am ready to do my megga-commit to add the first stage of KSE-threading support to the kernel. If there is any argument as to the wisdom of this move, then this is the time to speak up! At this stage a commit would break alpha and ia64 until they are patched. From experience I can say that it's not a horrific change to the machine dependent code so patches PRE commit would be welcome. I would ask that we get some indication from the IA64/Alpha/etc folks about this *before* you commit, even if they're not ready with patches yet, it would be wise to know how long before they would be. -- ... every activity meets with opposition, everyone who acts has his rivals and unfortunately opponents also. But not because people want to be opponents, rather because the tasks and relationships force people to take different points of view. [Dr. Fritz Todt] V I C T O R Y N O T V E N G E A N C E To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: Headsup! KSE Nay-sayers speak up!
It seems Julian Elischer wrote: I am ready to do my megga-commit to add the first stage of KSE-threading support to the kernel. If there is any argument as to the wisdom of this move, then this is the time to speak up! At this stage a commit would break alpha and ia64 until they are patched. From experience I can say that it's not a horrific change to the machine dependent code so patches PRE commit would be welcome. Could we have an URL to these changes, so we could see what its all about, I dont like to comment on code before I've seen it -Søren To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: Headsup! KSE Nay-sayers speak up!
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Julian Elischer writes: I am ready to do my megga-commit to add the first stage of KSE-threading support to the kernel. If there is any argument as to the wisdom of this move, then this is the time to speak up! I say No, not yet. Not yet, because in practice nobody has been running your patches yet. Not yet, because we have seen no quantified performance impact numbers (yes, I'm trying to arrange to help you produce these but on a P5/133 things are _S_L_O_W_! Not yet, because I seriously doubt if anybody has had any time to review and reflect on the way you have gone around and done things. Not yet, because there are, as I understand it, unresolved issues with KAME. Not yet, because you are generalizing from only one platform, get at least alpha working first. So I propose: Put up your patches in a highly visible place and advertise them on -current, -arch and -smp. Once at least 5 developers have publically said I'm running these patches on my -current machine(s) and it doesn't totally hose me and at least 3 of those machines are SMP and one is non-i386 architecture, then call for last orders before commit. -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 [EMAIL PROTECTED] | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence. To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
RE: Headsup! KSE Nay-sayers speak up!
On Mon, 27 Aug 2001, Garrett Wollman wrote: On Mon, 27 Aug 2001 09:34:06 -0700 (PDT), John Baldwin [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: Just to get this out in the public: I for one think 5.x has enough changes in it and would like for KSE to be postponed to 6.0-current and 6.0-release. I agree. I'd like to see this stuff happen, but I think it's too disruptive a change while we still haven't yet gotten over many of the SMPng issues yet. Sorry to butt in on this conversation here, but wasn't one of the main points of 5.0 and SMPng to bring KSE's into FreeBSD? Ken To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: Headsup! KSE Nay-sayers speak up!
On Mon, 27 Aug 2001, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: (phk-isms) I found Poul-Henning's comments struck a chord with me. I agree with his comments that a commit at this point would be premature, and that more review is required. In particular, it seems like his observation that we need additional eyes and hands involved, which will give us more perspective on the work. This would probably be a good opportunity for those relying on Julian to do all the work to look at what he's done, and better yet, run it :-) Before we can make the hard choice, we need more information, and not surprisingly, that's going to require some investment. I think it's definitely an investment worth making, as KSE offers a great deal of promise. Robert N M Watson FreeBSD Core Team, TrustedBSD Project [EMAIL PROTECTED] NAI Labs, Safeport Network Services To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: Headsup! KSE Nay-sayers speak up!
How about this . . . Although not running a multi-processor machine, are there guinnea-pigs, like me, who run current and do not mind carrying Julians work in our kernel. As I understand there is no set time-line for SMPng integration, is there ? I would not mind running KSE, and that only on a i686 laptop. Let's call for an interest list. +1 me My main interest is getting the Java Native threads port moving forward, beco- ming rock-solid. Ciao, derweil. -- Carlo In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Julian Elischer writes: I am ready to do my megga-commit to add the first stage of KSE-threading support to the kernel. If there is any argument as to the wisdom of this move, then this is the time to speak up! I say No, not yet. Not yet, because in practice nobody has been running your patches yet. Not yet, because we have seen no quantified performance impact numbers (yes, I'm trying to arrange to help you produce these but on a P5/133 things are _S_L_O_W_! Not yet, because I seriously doubt if anybody has had any time to review and reflect on the way you have gone around and done things. Not yet, because there are, as I understand it, unresolved issues with KAME. Not yet, because you are generalizing from only one platform, get at least alpha working first. So I propose: Put up your patches in a highly visible place and advertise them on -current, -arch and -smp. Once at least 5 developers have publically said I'm running these patches on my -current machine(s) and it doesn't totally hose me and at least 3 of those machines are SMP and one is non-i386 architecture, then call for last orders before commit. -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 [EMAIL PROTECTED] | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence. To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message -- -BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK- Version: 2.6.3ia Comment: requires PGP version 2.6 or later mQENAzQOnboAAAEIALnpSTc5y2g21CIX5V9bMqxsixXpQZDyR3hGosGsPC8S0WXP xfJiXAw/Zq3sPZhmiGZWq8/QP/d69tm4ert6rGB5Vuue96beKei4iemBF1ZpTU9G 3/tLsL63GHTLDAf+jqNcp1xM5ORF+qkFqP1ForzED06ba7HPQomzD0uhPbczHr9p vLAsczg1Wm9op06m7VTgK/hEvOJZPdxu0i2mFC2KVmRJr/KLcjs4CyEt6S8cJk8F Q3vDOOvwa+j/AHkvejBYokNYbfA+5D6bbYmNl5GxsKmY/qxamEaPWy7lZ87v8J0E CwnfzxiFPlguHCAux3u388EWqGWyAqOeROtKqL0ABRG0JkNhcmxvIERhcG9yIDxk YXBvckBuZXNzaWUuaW5mLmV0aHouY2g+iQEVAwUQNA6dugKjnkTrSqi9AQH3kAf/ T7dFJl6YQbUKSwTxNX/rERk2W010j2fH1bkbgOOfEfvQ6LiIRJYmJQCgeehP8kEU V66vSPboGsjl+8wU5CdlmoPsf7xw94Dh+uI48/CKLFAu+Rq2lonQOuzSvEDGg1P0 pU4UyCdj5i+y89jS+wBNA/yG6wsEGWMVltWqB2UKSg1n3YbA8JqaO2x9JLtIzfoB J/jhl5Jl4kX8OJzX1XVlJTxYdu9PTwaTZP68EG6NNfEyCn5Fp6iSDtUrLms1pI5i 3U282bIhBgVXr19hVS2olqTUHGdgcRqFjcnrARIBKoB9stuKj1+ORqlDiLwJfvg5 6JNSM4HFutk/iftKBqYXhQ== =XYxp -END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK- To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: Headsup! KSE Nay-sayers speak up!
* Carlo Dapor [EMAIL PROTECTED] [010827 13:49] wrote: How about this . . . Although not running a multi-processor machine, are there guinnea-pigs, like me, who run current and do not mind carrying Julians work in our kernel. As I understand there is no set time-line for SMPng integration, is there ? I would not mind running KSE, and that only on a i686 laptop. Let's call for an interest list. +1 me My main interest is getting the Java Native threads port moving forward, beco- ming rock-solid. I'd also like to see the delta committed asap. -Alfred To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: Headsup! KSE Nay-sayers speak up!
One thing I forgot, sorry. If there is a considerable amount of people, i would appreciate it if we get the 'common' commits that go to current filtered through p4 in some way. I would dislike it to have to resort to editing every single delta . . . Ciao, derweil. -- Carlo How about this . . . Although not running a multi-processor machine, are there guinnea-pigs, like me, who run current and do not mind carrying Julians work in our kernel. As I understand there is no set time-line for SMPng integration, is there ? I would not mind running KSE, and that only on a i686 laptop. Let's call for an interest list. +1 me My main interest is getting the Java Native threads port moving forward, beco- ming rock-solid. Ciao, derweil. -- Carlo To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
RE: Headsup! KSE Nay-sayers speak up!
On 27-Aug-01 Julian Elischer wrote: I am ready to do my megga-commit to add the first stage of KSE-threading support to the kernel. If there is any argument as to the wisdom of this move, then this is the time to speak up! At this stage a commit would break alpha and ia64 until they are patched. From experience I can say that it's not a horrific change to the machine dependent code so patches PRE commit would be welcome. Just to get this out in the public: I for one think 5.x has enough changes in it and would like for KSE to be postponed to 6.0-current and 6.0-release. I know that I am in the minority on this, but wanted to say it anyways. It doesn't mean I don't like the KSE work or anything like that (I've even helped out on it some), I just think we have enough work in our basket. Also, I'll point out that p4's merging abilities make tracking current relatively easy, much more so than if Julian was maintaining a separate tree with this patch and having to keep updating current and manually merge it all the time. /stump -- John Baldwin [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/ PGP Key: http://www.baldwin.cx/~john/pgpkey.asc Power Users Use the Power to Serve! - http://www.FreeBSD.org/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: Headsup! KSE Nay-sayers speak up!
Mike Smith wrote: I would ask that we get some indication from the IA64/Alpha/etc folks about this *before* you commit, even if they're not ready with patches yet, it would be wise to know how long before they would be. see the other email discussing exactly this -- ++ __ _ __ | __--_|\ Julian Elischer | \ U \/ / hard at work in | / \ [EMAIL PROTECTED] +--x USA\ a very strange | ( OZ)\___ ___ | country ! +- X_.---._/presently in San Francisco \_/ \\ v To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
RE: Headsup! KSE Nay-sayers speak up!
On Mon, 27 Aug 2001, John Baldwin wrote: On 27-Aug-01 Julian Elischer wrote: I am ready to do my megga-commit to add the first stage of KSE-threading support to the kernel. If there is any argument as to the wisdom of this move, then this is the time to speak up! At this stage a commit would break alpha and ia64 until they are patched. From experience I can say that it's not a horrific change to the machine dependent code so patches PRE commit would be welcome. Just to get this out in the public: I for one think 5.x has enough changes in it and would like for KSE to be postponed to 6.0-current and 6.0-release. I know that I am in the minority on this, but wanted to say it anyways. It doesn't mean I don't like the KSE work or anything like that (I've even helped out on it some), I just think we have enough work in our basket. Also, I'll point out that p4's merging abilities make tracking current relatively easy, much more so than if Julian was maintaining a separate tree with this patch and having to keep updating current and manually merge it all the time. I think waiting for 6.0-current is too long. Perhaps after 5.0-release. If we get this in 5.0, we might be able to have a usable kse threads library for 5.1 or 5.2. I've used p4 to track the CAM changes before they were in -current. It was initially easy when only the kernel was involved, but once userland was was touched I ended up having to use p4 to track everything else. At the time I didn't have enough disk space to have both a CVS src/ tree and a p4 tree. Plus it's difficult when you have more than one development system because you can't just keep one CVS repo and update all your systems from that. -- Dan Eischen To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: Headsup! KSE Nay-sayers speak up!
John Baldwin wrote: On 27-Aug-01 Julian Elischer wrote: I am ready to do my megga-commit to add the first stage of KSE-threading support to the kernel. If there is any argument as to the wisdom of this move, then this is the time to speak up! At this stage a commit would break alpha and ia64 until they are patched. From experience I can say that it's not a horrific change to the machine dependent code so patches PRE commit would be welcome. Just to get this out in the public: I for one think 5.x has enough changes in it and would like for KSE to be postponed to 6.0-current and 6.0-release. I know that I am in the minority on this, but wanted to say it anyways. It doesn't mean I don't like the KSE work or anything like that (I've even helped out on it some), I just think we have enough work in our basket. Also, I'll point out that p4's merging abilities make tracking current relatively easy, much more so than if Julian was maintaining a separate tree with this patch and having to keep updating current and manually merge it all the time. /stump well I expected this to some extent.. This is why I asked.. I want to get it out where it can be discussed. the same could also be said for full pre-emption and SMP-NG. It is also interestingto note that KSE isn't the only game in town. The new PTNG package looks interesting, using normal process rforking to generate a pthreads environment. (It's a rewrite, not a port of linux threads). All I have done is brought the kernel to a state where it is READY for work to break the 1:1 barrier. It is basically logically exactly the same kernel as in -current. I think it introduces far fewer logical changes than, say, the pre-emption code, or the locking code. I agree that we could wait. I don't however think we should. I'd rather have ONE broken period than two. At USENIX we agreed that if I got this done it would be committed and work could start to provide the facilities that Dan and Chris need for the Userland code to develop. Remember, that unless you turn this on, it's a very complicated NOP. What P4 does is really irrelevent because there are only 4 people using it.. (or is that 3?). It needs a distribution channel, and P4 isn't it. (at least not at the moment.) What it DOES do however is make your locking code more challenging. But that is going to have to be faced at some time -- ++ __ _ __ | __--_|\ Julian Elischer | \ U \/ / hard at work in | / \ [EMAIL PROTECTED] +--x USA\ a very strange | ( OZ)\___ ___ | country ! +- X_.---._/presently in San Francisco \_/ \\ v To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
RE: Headsup! KSE Nay-sayers speak up!
On Mon, 27 Aug 2001 09:34:06 -0700 (PDT), John Baldwin [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: Just to get this out in the public: I for one think 5.x has enough changes in it and would like for KSE to be postponed to 6.0-current and 6.0-release. I agree. I'd like to see this stuff happen, but I think it's too disruptive a change while we still haven't yet gotten over many of the SMPng issues yet. -GAWollman To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
RE: Headsup! KSE Nay-sayers speak up!
On 27-Aug-01 Daniel Eischen wrote: On Mon, 27 Aug 2001, John Baldwin wrote: On 27-Aug-01 Julian Elischer wrote: I am ready to do my megga-commit to add the first stage of KSE-threading support to the kernel. If there is any argument as to the wisdom of this move, then this is the time to speak up! At this stage a commit would break alpha and ia64 until they are patched. From experience I can say that it's not a horrific change to the machine dependent code so patches PRE commit would be welcome. Just to get this out in the public: I for one think 5.x has enough changes in it and would like for KSE to be postponed to 6.0-current and 6.0-release. I know that I am in the minority on this, but wanted to say it anyways. It doesn't mean I don't like the KSE work or anything like that (I've even helped out on it some), I just think we have enough work in our basket. Also, I'll point out that p4's merging abilities make tracking current relatively easy, much more so than if Julian was maintaining a separate tree with this patch and having to keep updating current and manually merge it all the time. I think waiting for 6.0-current is too long. Perhaps after 5.0-release. If we get this in 5.0, we might be able to have a usable kse threads library for 5.1 or 5.2. I'm predicting a short release cycle between 5.0 and 6.0 (compared to 4.0 and 5.0) because 6.0 is probably going to be much more stable than 5.x. I've used p4 to track the CAM changes before they were in -current. It was initially easy when only the kernel was involved, but once userland was was touched I ended up having to use p4 to track everything else. At the time I didn't have enough disk space to have both a CVS src/ tree and a p4 tree. Plus it's difficult when you have more than one development system because you can't just keep one CVS repo and update all your systems from that. NFS works for that (it's what I do with all my development systems, one shared kernel souce tree over NFS with various p4 kernel sys trees checked out). However, I agree adding userland into the mix will complicate things. -- John Baldwin [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/ PGP Key: http://www.baldwin.cx/~john/pgpkey.asc Power Users Use the Power to Serve! - http://www.FreeBSD.org/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: Headsup! KSE Nay-sayers speak up!
On 27-Aug-01 Julian Elischer wrote: John Baldwin wrote: On 27-Aug-01 Julian Elischer wrote: I am ready to do my megga-commit to add the first stage of KSE-threading support to the kernel. If there is any argument as to the wisdom of this move, then this is the time to speak up! At this stage a commit would break alpha and ia64 until they are patched. From experience I can say that it's not a horrific change to the machine dependent code so patches PRE commit would be welcome. Just to get this out in the public: I for one think 5.x has enough changes in it and would like for KSE to be postponed to 6.0-current and 6.0-release. I know that I am in the minority on this, but wanted to say it anyways. It doesn't mean I don't like the KSE work or anything like that (I've even helped out on it some), I just think we have enough work in our basket. Also, I'll point out that p4's merging abilities make tracking current relatively easy, much more so than if Julian was maintaining a separate tree with this patch and having to keep updating current and manually merge it all the time. /stump well I expected this to some extent.. This is why I asked.. I want to get it out where it can be discussed. the same could also be said for full pre-emption and SMP-NG. Note that I haven't committed preemption (largely because it doesn't work on SMP and alpha yet. :-P). However, SMPng is one large change for 5.x. Not sure how many large changes we want to do at a time. All I have done is brought the kernel to a state where it is READY for work to break the 1:1 barrier. It is basically logically exactly the same kernel as in -current. I think it introduces far fewer logical changes than, say, the pre-emption code, or the locking code. I agree that we could wait. I don't however think we should. I'd rather have ONE broken period than two. At USENIX we agreed that if I got this done it would be committed and work could start to provide the facilities that Dan and Chris need for the Userland code to develop. Remember, that unless you turn this on, it's a very complicated NOP. The problem becomes that if something breaks, where do you go to look for the bug? Is it a SMPng bug? Or a KSE bug? Getting SMPng to a state where a good portion (say, at least 2 major subsystems) are out from under Giant will be the first good stress testing of the concurrency and good stress testing of SMPng. It could potentially get pretty bumpy when that happens, and having KSE add to that bumpiness may make things very complicated. I wasn't in favor of KSE's in 5.0 at Usenix, but saw that I was in an obvious minority. I'm still in the minority and realize that and don't expect my opinions here to make any difference. I just wanted to voice my concerns. What it DOES do however is make your locking code more challenging. But that is going to have to be faced at some time Yes, but I'd rather face it after we've made more progress on SMPng first. -- John Baldwin [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/ PGP Key: http://www.baldwin.cx/~john/pgpkey.asc Power Users Use the Power to Serve! - http://www.FreeBSD.org/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
RE: Headsup! KSE Nay-sayers speak up!
On 27-Aug-01 Kenneth Wayne Culver wrote: On Mon, 27 Aug 2001, Garrett Wollman wrote: On Mon, 27 Aug 2001 09:34:06 -0700 (PDT), John Baldwin [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: Just to get this out in the public: I for one think 5.x has enough changes in it and would like for KSE to be postponed to 6.0-current and 6.0-release. I agree. I'd like to see this stuff happen, but I think it's too disruptive a change while we still haven't yet gotten over many of the SMPng issues yet. Sorry to butt in on this conversation here, but wasn't one of the main points of 5.0 and SMPng to bring KSE's into FreeBSD? No, SMPng and KSE are two different tasks. SMPng is multithreading the kernel to allow concurrent access to the kernel. KSE is changing the kernel to support physical concurrent threads of execution within a logical process, if that makes any sense. Either one is potentially useful w/o the other, but both together will build upon each other. Ken -- John Baldwin [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/ PGP Key: http://www.baldwin.cx/~john/pgpkey.asc Power Users Use the Power to Serve! - http://www.FreeBSD.org/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
RE: Headsup! KSE Nay-sayers speak up!
At 10:39 AM -0700 8/27/01, John Baldwin wrote: On 27-Aug-01 Daniel Eischen wrote: I think waiting for 6.0-current is too long. Perhaps after 5.0-release. If we get this in 5.0, we might be able to have a usable kse threads library for 5.1 or 5.2. I'm predicting a short release cycle between 5.0 and 6.0 (compared to 4.0 and 5.0) because 6.0 is probably going to be much more stable than 5.x. 5.0 (or whatever name it will go by) is slated for November, right? And the plan was that a new 6.0-current branch wouldn't even be STARTED until sometime next year, because we'll be concentrating on the reliability of 5.x. These kernel changes have to go in before anyone can work on userland changes. My guess is that if we do not get the KSE kernel stuff into 5.0, then we probably won't get to the desired userland features until sometime WELL into 2003. Maybe that's better than the gap between 4.0 and 5.0, but I think it's too long to have these changes waiting around. At the kernel summit meeting, Julian was given a green light with the timetable of getting this set of changes done by August. Right now it is pretty late in August, but (thanks partially to help from others) that schedule has basically been kept to. It would be nice to reward that effort by getting these changes in. Having said that, let me also say: In a separate message, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: So I propose: Put up your patches in a highly visible place and advertise them on -current, -arch and -smp. Once at least 5 developers have publically said I'm running these patches on my -current machine(s) and it doesn't totally hose me and at least 3 of those machines are SMP and one is non-i386 architecture, then call for last orders before commit. This does seem prudent to me. We should have at least a few more people running these changes before they get committed to current, and preferably on more than the i386 platform. If we are going to be serious about supporting more hardware platforms, then we have to start treating them more seriously when major changes like this come along. If we can't get some broader testing of this done in the next few weeks, then the changes should probably wait until after 5.0. All the above are just my opinions, of course. -- Garance Alistair Drosehn= [EMAIL PROTECTED] Senior Systems Programmer or [EMAIL PROTECTED] Rensselaer Polytechnic Instituteor [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: Headsup! KSE Nay-sayers speak up!
On Mon, 27 Aug 2001, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Julian Elischer writes: I am ready to do my megga-commit to add the first stage of KSE-threading support to the kernel. If there is any argument as to the wisdom of this move, then this is the time to speak up! I say No, not yet. Not yet, because in practice nobody has been running your patches yet. Not yet, because we have seen no quantified performance impact numbers (yes, I'm trying to arrange to help you produce these but on a P5/133 things are _S_L_O_W_! Not yet, because I seriously doubt if anybody has had any time to review and reflect on the way you have gone around and done things. Not yet, because there are, as I understand it, unresolved issues with KAME. Not yet, because you are generalizing from only one platform, get at least alpha working first. So I propose: Put up your patches in a highly visible place and advertise them on -current, -arch and -smp. Already done several times... Once at least 5 developers have publically said I'm running these patches on my -current machine(s) and it doesn't totally hose me and at least 3 of those machines are SMP and one is non-i386 architecture, then call for last orders before commit. I agree.. this is first orders :-) -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 [EMAIL PROTECTED] | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence. To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: RE: Headsup! KSE Nay-sayers speak up!
Sheesh. Everyone is so negative! Well, I'm going to be too. I think compared to some of the other things that have been thrown into -current, the KSE stuff will be the LEAST disruptive. Don't go bashing Julian for coming up with a reasoned approach to adding them, discussing the concept at many meetings (including at USENIX), and doing all the hard work to get it done. He's done a hellof a lot more discussion and worked with people a lot more any other feature that has been thrown into -current. He doesn't deserve these kind of responses, not after all the work that's been done. He's been talking about this for 2 years. TWO years! - Just for myself, I am seriously considering just throwing the whole lot (-current, that is) away and starting over from -stable. I spent 20 hours last weekend trying to unwind even part of the VM system from Giant, and failed utterly. I'd love to see the KSE stuff in -stable, I think it might even be a better fit. I am seriously considering this because I think we made a huge mistake throwing away the spl*() mechanism in -current, as a means of getting out from under the Giant lock paradigm quickly and partitioning the problem in a manner that allows subsystems to be worked on independantly. And I don't see any way to get it back. The spl*() mechanism already partitions the major subsystems that *need* to operate concurrently: I/O, interrupts, and the network stack. We would be able to work on major subsystems independantly and we would be able to debug things much more easily. -current as it currently stands is very nearly undebuggable. I've been thinking about this for the last few months... I am still thinking about it. I haven't made a decision yet. I think if KSEs go into -current I would stick with it, but if KSEs do not go into -current I don't see much of a point, -current will have wholely gone off in a direction that I don't believe in (rather then just mostly gone off). -Matt To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: Headsup! KSE Nay-sayers speak up!
Julian Elischer wrote: John Baldwin wrote: On 27-Aug-01 Julian Elischer wrote: I am ready to do my megga-commit to add the first stage of KSE-threading support to the kernel. If there is any argument as to the wisdom of this move, then this is the time to speak up! At this stage a commit would break alpha and ia64 until they are patched. From experience I can say that it's not a horrific change to the machine dependent code so patches PRE commit would be welcome. Just to get this out in the public: I for one think 5.x has enough changes in it and would like for KSE to be postponed to 6.0-current and 6.0-release. I know that I am in the minority on this, but wanted to say it anyways. It doesn't mean I don't like the KSE work or anything like that (I've even helped out on it some), I just think we have enough work in our basket. Also, I'll point out that p4's merging abilities make tracking current relatively easy, much more so than if Julian was maintaining a separate tree with this patch and having to keep updating current and manually merge it all the time. /stump well I expected this to some extent.. This is why I asked.. I want to get it out where it can be discussed. the same could also be said for full pre-emption and SMP-NG. It is also interestingto note that KSE isn't the only game in town. The new PTNG package looks interesting, using normal process rforking to generate a pthreads environment. (It's a rewrite, not a port of linux threads). All I have done is brought the kernel to a state where it is READY for work to break the 1:1 barrier. It is basically logically exactly the same kernel as in -current. I think it introduces far fewer logical changes than, say, the pre-emption code, or the locking code. I agree that we could wait. I don't however think we should. I'd rather have ONE broken period than two. At USENIX we agreed that if I got this done it would be committed and work could start to provide the facilities that Dan and Chris need for the Userland code to develop. Remember, that unless you turn this on, it's a very complicated NOP. What P4 does is really irrelevent because there are only 4 people using it.. (or is that 3?). It needs a distribution channel, and P4 isn't it. (at least not at the moment.) What it DOES do however is make your locking code more challenging. But that is going to have to be faced at some time Count my vote as a go-for-it. I agree that waiting for 6.0 would be too long indeed. I think that having the KSE framework in the kernel for 5.0 would be a good thing, along with SMPNG... I don't think this is going to turn into another 2.0-RELEASE fiasco [No offense, David, but 2.0-R was buggier than a bum's blanket], which, I may add, was quite quckly made stable after the initial -RELEASE. My one question is: If it does turn into another 2.0-R fiasco, are you ready to put in the hours needed to put out a QUICK bugfix -RELEASE [a la 5.0.5 or whatever?]. I would still prefer a stable -RELEASE. As far as intel goes, I say go for it! jim -- ET has one helluva sense of humor! He's always anal-probing right-wing schizos! _ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Re: Headsup! KSE Nay-sayers speak up!
I am ready to do my megga-commit to add the first stage of KSE-threading support to the kernel. If there is any argument as to the wisdom of this move, then this is the time to speak up! I have one system that I've been maintaining/updating since the 2.X days and I feel it's time to nuke it and start over. +1 for a non-smp system and SMP system. That said, I think the value of having both KSE and SMPng in 5.0 is HUGE and I think there is probably a large number of people that would be willing to endure kernel panics, dumps, etc. because the value (in terms of technological accomplishment and saleability in the corporate space) would be absolutely worth the bumpy road. -CURRENT isn't worth tracking unless the dumps, bugs, etc are all going toward both SMPng and KSE. Hey, anyone running -current without a tape drive attached with a daily dump schedule is either insane, a masochist, or both. Read my post from this morning about the mysterious filesystem corruption I had this morning... Kudos to Justin Gibbs for fixing EOM detection [let's get his scsi_sa.c patches committed ASAP]!!! Thanks for the heads up! Fortunately I have a few -STABLE systems that I can dump to and that host all of my email/development. ;) I'll probably go and pick up another 40+GB HD just for the extra head-room. If there are grave concerns about having KSE and SMPng in 5.X, then why not push back the release date? The value far outweighs the extra months needed to get it finished and out the door, but what do I know, I'm just a quiet kernel by standard making an observation. -sc Good idea. Seriously, is there any reason to hold to a time line at the expense of some very important and very fundamental enhancements to FreeBSD? I suppose that's something for -core to talk about/discuss, but I bet that if a poll was put on the homepage of FreeBSD.org (hint hint) asking about this, you'd get an overwhelming response to see KSE/SMPng in 5.X. With a poll you might even pick up some more testers given the exposure (hint hint). -sc -- Sean Chittenden PGP signature
Re: Headsup! KSE Nay-sayers speak up!
Matt Dillon wrote: : and preferably on more than the i386 platform. If we are going to : be serious about supporting more hardware platforms, then we have : to start treating them more seriously when major changes like this : come along. If we can't get some broader testing of this done in : the next few weeks, then the changes should probably wait until : after 5.0. : : :I believe that I read in an earlier thread that the archetecture-specific changes are minimal, and that majority of the changes are :in high-level constructs in the kernel. Of course, I could be recalling this incorrectly, but I don't think I am... : :jim Yes, this is correct. The assembly changes are just structural indirections for things that were broken off from the proc structure. The scheduler now messes with 'threads' rather then 'processes' for the most part. That part of the diff set is involved but straight forward. Julian also add KSTACK_PAGES to allow the kernel stack to be specified in a more controlled manner. Here is an excerpt so you can see what I mean: ... - - movlP_VMSPACE(%ecx), %edx + movlTD_PROC(%ecx), %eax + movlP_VMSPACE(%eax), %edx movlPCPU(CPUID), %eax btrl%eax, VM_PMAP+PM_ACTIVE(%edx) - movlP_ADDR(%ecx),%edx + movlTD_PCB(%ecx),%edx ... See? not much too it. -Matt That's about what I thought it would be... If the other archetectures are so flaky right now under FreeBSD, then maybe some people are barking up the wrong tree when it comes to opposing KSE integration using the other archetectures as the crux of their argument. Sounds like they need to be kicking some butts to catch up with the pack! Testing should be across the board, but I don't see any reason why, if the maintainers of the other archetectures are so behind on other tasks that they can't have a seperate, later, 5.0-RELEASE for them. We shouldn't sacrifice intel functionality for timetable slippage on the other archetectures, and honestly, that's how I'm reading the arguments against... Again, I could be wrong, but... Of course, we could always end up like NetBSD, with a development cycle that makes FreeBSD's current cycle look fast, only because of support for all of the different archetectures. No offense to the NetBSD'ers out there, NetBSD is a fine OS, but my point is that FreeBSD is [or was] a different paradigm, primarily [but not exclusively] intel. jim -- ET has one helluva sense of humor! He's always anal-probing right-wing schizos! _ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: Headsup! KSE Nay-sayers speak up!
On Mon, Aug 27, 2001 at 04:00:35PM -0500, Jim Bryant wrote: Matt Dillon wrote: : and preferably on more than the i386 platform. If we are going to : be serious about supporting more hardware platforms, then we have : to start treating them more seriously when major changes like this : come along. If we can't get some broader testing of this done in ... That's about what I thought it would be... If the other archetectures are so flaky right now under FreeBSD, then maybe some people are barking up the wrong tree when it comes to opposing KSE integration using the other archetectures as the crux of their argument. Sounds like they need to be kicking some butts to catch up with the pack! Testing should be across the board, but I don't see any reason why, if the maintainers of the other archetectures are so behind on other tasks that they can't have a seperate, later, 5.0-RELEASE for them. We shouldn't sacrifice intel functionality for timetable slippage on the other archetectures, and honestly, that's how I'm reading the arguments against... Again, I could be wrong, but... You are. This is a far to simplistic (and IMHO quite rude) approach to the non-x86 work that has been done over time. Of course, we could always end up like NetBSD, with a development cycle that makes FreeBSD's current cycle look fast, only because of support for all of the different archetectures. No offense to the NetBSD'ers out there, NetBSD is a fine OS, but my point is that FreeBSD is [or was] a different paradigm, primarily [but not exclusively] intel. You seem to have missed the advent of arm, sparc64, powerpc ports for FreeBSD. -- | / o / / _ Arnhem, The Netherlands email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] |/|/ / / /( (_) Bulte To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
RE: Headsup! KSE Nay-sayers speak up!
On Mon, 27 Aug 2001, Garance A Drosihn wrote: This does seem prudent to me. We should have at least a few more people running these changes before they get committed to current, and preferably on more than the i386 platform. If we are going to be serious about supporting more hardware platforms, then we have to start treating them more seriously when major changes like this come along. If we can't get some broader testing of this done in the next few weeks, then the changes should probably wait until after 5.0. I don't WANT to commit without more testing and more support for the other platforms. However I need support from the people DOING those platforms to go further. I also want more people to try the patches. So far the only problem Matt Dillon and I have seen is the re-appearance of a panic during reboot that must be something silly I've done :-) I'll be doing MFC's each day into P4, and keeping my patch set at http://www.freebsd.org/~julian/thediff up to date. (If you have cvs access you have P4 access if you'd rather do that) To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: RE: Headsup! KSE Nay-sayers speak up!
On Mon, 27 Aug 2001, Matt Dillon wrote: Sheesh. Everyone is so negative! Well, I'm going to be too. I think compared to some of the other things that have been thrown into -current, the KSE stuff will be the LEAST disruptive. Don't go bashing Julian for coming up with a reasoned approach to adding them, discussing the concept at many meetings (including at USENIX), and doing all the hard work to get it done. He's done a hellof a lot more discussion and worked with people a lot more any other feature that has been thrown into -current. He doesn't deserve these kind of responses, not after all the work that's been done. He's been talking about this for 2 years. TWO years! With all due respect, I was not attempting to bash Julian. I was raising two classes of concerns that seemed to merit further discussion: (1) technical concerns relating to SMPng, and (2) concerns about the release schedule for 5.0-RELEASE. Neither of these reflects on Julian's work, rather, the environment in which the work is being done, and external constraints on the work that must be considered. Julian has responded with a detailed response addressing these concerns. I think it might be more constructive to consider this discussion in those terms, and avoid concepts like bash. We know we need to make an informed decision here, which means we need to consider all the options, which may mean discussing the controversial ones. I'm not fundamentally opposed to KSE: I would like to see it in the system as much as you, and am quite aware of the potential benefits. I just want to make sure we don't go three years without a stable release to get there. If the answer to the questions is either fine, or addressible, then we're set. John has expressed a number of concerns with regards to SMPng, and I take those concerns seriously. I'm still reading Julian's response, and will no doubt respond to that later if I have any further questions :-). Robert N M Watson FreeBSD Core Team, TrustedBSD Project [EMAIL PROTECTED] NAI Labs, Safeport Network Services To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: Headsup! KSE Nay-sayers speak up!
Garance A Drosihn wrote: At 1:49 PM -0700 8/27/01, Sean Chittenden wrote: If there are grave concerns about having KSE and SMPng in 5.X, then why not push back the release date? The value far outweighs the extra months needed to get it finished and out the door, ...etc... Good idea. Seriously, is there any reason to hold to a time line at the expense of some very important and very fundamental enhancements to FreeBSD? I suppose that's something for -core to talk about/discuss, but I bet that if a poll was put on the homepage of FreeBSD.org (hint hint) asking about this, you'd get an overwhelming response to see KSE/SMPng in 5.X. With a poll you might even pick up some more testers given the exposure (hint hint). -sc We can't just keep pushing back the release date because some very important enhancements could be made. It will ALWAYS be true that there are more very important enhancements on the horizon, and you can't keep running after those. You have to pick some point, and stick to that point, and ship at that point. As long as current is known to be in rapid flux, most I'm glad you support integration of KSE then... As I recall such threading was in the original design specs for 5.0, as released when work on 5.0 began. jim -- ET has one helluva sense of humor! He's always anal-probing right-wing schizos! _ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: Headsup! KSE Nay-sayers speak up!
On 27-Aug-01 Jim Bryant wrote: Garance A Drosihn wrote: At 1:49 PM -0700 8/27/01, Sean Chittenden wrote: If there are grave concerns about having KSE and SMPng in 5.X, then why not push back the release date? The value far outweighs the extra months needed to get it finished and out the door, ...etc... Good idea. Seriously, is there any reason to hold to a time line at the expense of some very important and very fundamental enhancements to FreeBSD? I suppose that's something for -core to talk about/discuss, but I bet that if a poll was put on the homepage of FreeBSD.org (hint hint) asking about this, you'd get an overwhelming response to see KSE/SMPng in 5.X. With a poll you might even pick up some more testers given the exposure (hint hint). -sc We can't just keep pushing back the release date because some very important enhancements could be made. It will ALWAYS be true that there are more very important enhancements on the horizon, and you can't keep running after those. You have to pick some point, and stick to that point, and ship at that point. As long as current is known to be in rapid flux, most I'm glad you support integration of KSE then... As I recall such threading was in the original design specs for 5.0, as released when work on 5.0 began. Yes, and if we had lots more man-hours on the KSE and SMPng projects such that they were farther along now things would be different. The fact is that the planning for 5.0 may have been a bit optimistic. However, I'll try and review the KSE diff as well. The diffs themselves aren't bad, I just think that we will end up with too much complexity and room for things to break each other with the breakage hard to find since you can't pin it down as easily. -- John Baldwin [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/ PGP Key: http://www.baldwin.cx/~john/pgpkey.asc Power Users Use the Power to Serve! - http://www.FreeBSD.org/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
RE: Headsup! KSE Nay-sayers speak up!
At 2:48 PM -0700 8/27/01, Julian Elischer wrote: I don't WANT to commit without more testing and more support for the other platforms. However I need support from the people DOING those platforms to go further. I also want more people to try the patches. So far the only problem Matt Dillon and I have seen is the re-appearance of a panic during reboot that must be something silly I've done :-) This sounds good. I'm hopefully just about a week away from having a little more spare time, at which point I could try -current on my dual-P3 box, and try your changes on top of that. At the moment I can't help much with any other platforms, although I would definitely be willing to help test powerPC changes (once that port is far enough along to run :-). I should admit that my interest in other architectures is more for the up-and-coming PowerPC and Sparc-64 ports, instead of the already- working port of Alpha... I'll be doing MFC's each day into P4, and keeping my patch set at http://www.freebsd.org/~julian/thediff up to date. (If you have cvs access you have P4 access if you'd rather do that) I can sense that some freebsd developers are having good luck with perforce, but for me it'd be one extra thing that I would have to figure out, and figuring out perforce isn't high on my current list of priorities... -- Garance Alistair Drosehn= [EMAIL PROTECTED] Senior Systems Programmer or [EMAIL PROTECTED] Rensselaer Polytechnic Instituteor [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: Headsup! KSE Nay-sayers speak up!
At 5:02 PM -0500 8/27/01, Jim Bryant wrote: Garance A Drosihn wrote: We can't just keep pushing back the release date because some very important enhancements could be made. It will ALWAYS be true that there are more very important enhancements on the horizon, and you can't keep running after those. You have to pick some point, and stick to that point, and ship at that point. As long as current is known to be in rapid flux, most I'm glad you support integration of KSE then... As I recall such threading was in the original design specs for 5.0, as released when work on 5.0 began. I'm disappointed that you completely misunderstood what I intended to say in the above. My point is that sometimes you have to stick to a ship date because you have to stick to that date, and not because you stick to some list of features that you'd like to see. The longer you let ship-dates slip, the longer you end up without a release-quality product. I think a lot of good work has gone into the current cut at KSE support, and I certainly hope it goes in. However, there are a number of other factors to consider. The right way to get KSE in 5.0 is to help do the work which is necessary for that to happen, and not to deliberately misquote people -- as you are pretty clearly doing in the above. What I explicitly said in the above message (and which you explicitly deleted) was that KSE should wait for a later release if the remaining work is not done. If you have some other opinion, that is fine, but do not reword *my* opinion to claim that I agree completely with your opinion. Julian did a lot of good work, all he needs is a few more developers to help test that work. None of us need a thread arguing about release dates vs some goals set two years ago. I support the integration of KSE in the sense that I intend to help test it (on a dual-CPU i386) sometime in the next week. I do not support a delay of 5.0. I can not test on Alpha, as I have no Alpha machines. Anyone who wants to prove their support for KSE in 5.0 should step up and offer to do some of the testing, etc. Actions will speak louder than any (misquoted) words. -- Garance Alistair Drosehn= [EMAIL PROTECTED] Senior Systems Programmer or [EMAIL PROTECTED] Rensselaer Polytechnic Instituteor [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: RE: Headsup! KSE Nay-sayers speak up!
:I'm not fundamentally opposed to KSE: I would like to see it in the system :as much as you, and am quite aware of the potential benefits. I just want :to make sure we don't go three years without a stable release to get :there. If the answer to the questions is either fine, or addressible, :... : :Robert N M Watson FreeBSD Core Team, TrustedBSD Project :[EMAIL PROTECTED] NAI Labs, Safeport Network Services I think if KSE goes in (in the next couple of weeks, on Julian's timeline with reasonable, but not excessive additional testing), I will personally be a much happier camper in regards to working on -current. To me it will be a real turning point for the project -- the last 'big' piece of technology we promised ourselves we would get in. And I have been and will continue to be available to help track down and work out bugs in that work, and in other work. The single biggest problem -current faces right now is in unwinding Giant. It is an even larger problem then people think, I think. Because Giant still surrounds nearly all the running code there are almost certainly dozens of bugs that will come out of the woodwork as Giant gets moved inward. Hell, maybe I shouldn't be working on the VM system at all right now... maybe I should be working on mutexing data structures in order to move Giant inward. e.g. filesystem and I/O paths. The VM code is the hardest piece, it should probably be saved for last. We are not going to truely be able to stabilize -current until Giant is mostly gone. -Matt To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: Headsup! KSE Nay-sayers speak up!
Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Julian Elischer writes: I am ready to do my megga-commit to add the first stage of KSE-threading support to the kernel. If there is any argument as to the wisdom of this move, then this is the time to speak up! I say No, not yet. Not yet, because in practice nobody has been running your patches yet. Not yet, because we have seen no quantified performance impact numbers (yes, I'm trying to arrange to help you produce these but on a P5/133 things are _S_L_O_W_! Not yet, because I seriously doubt if anybody has had any time to review and reflect on the way you have gone around and done things. Not yet, because there are, as I understand it, unresolved issues with KAME. Not yet, because you are generalizing from only one platform, get at least alpha working first. So I propose: Put up your patches in a highly visible place and advertise them on -current, -arch and -smp. Once at least 5 developers have publically said I'm running these patches on my -current machine(s) and it doesn't totally hose me and at least 3 of those machines are SMP and one is non-i386 architecture, then call for last orders before commit. If Julian can guarantee it won't hose me completely from the get-go, count me as a tester. The box I would be testing this on is SMP, albeit, intel. jim -- ET has one helluva sense of humor! He's always anal-probing right-wing schizos! _ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: Headsup! KSE Nay-sayers speak up!
I am ready to do my megga-commit to add the first stage of KSE-threading support to the kernel. If there is any argument as to the wisdom of this move, then this is the time to speak up! I have one system that I've been maintaining/updating since the 2.X days and I feel it's time to nuke it and start over. +1 for a non-smp system and SMP system. That said, I think the value of having both KSE and SMPng in 5.0 is HUGE and I think there is probably a large number of people that would be willing to endure kernel panics, dumps, etc. because the value (in terms of technological accomplishment and saleability in the corporate space) would be absolutely worth the bumpy road. -CURRENT isn't worth tracking unless the dumps, bugs, etc are all going toward both SMPng and KSE. If there are grave concerns about having KSE and SMPng in 5.X, then why not push back the release date? The value far outweighs the extra months needed to get it finished and out the door, but what do I know, I'm just a quiet kernel by standard making an observation. -sc -- Sean Chittenden PGP signature
Re: Headsup! KSE Nay-sayers speak up!
Garance A Drosihn wrote: 5.0 (or whatever name it will go by) is slated for November, right? And the plan was that a new 6.0-current branch wouldn't even be STARTED until sometime next year, because we'll be concentrating on the reliability of 5.x. These kernel changes have to go in before anyone can work on userland changes. My guess is that if we do not get the KSE kernel stuff into 5.0, then we probably won't get to the desired userland features until sometime WELL into 2003. Maybe that's better than the gap between 4.0 and 5.0, but I think it's too long to have these changes waiting around. I agree... I thought the idea of 5.0 was to kick Linux in the butt. It isn't as if they are just sitting around... FreeBSD is going to be left in the dust unless both the SMPng *AND* KSE projects are integrated into 5.0. At the kernel summit meeting, Julian was given a green light with the timetable of getting this set of changes done by August. Right now it is pretty late in August, but (thanks partially to help from others) that schedule has basically been kept to. It would be nice to reward that effort by getting these changes in. [Looks at calandar] Yup! It's August! Good work Julian! This does seem prudent to me. We should have at least a few more people running these changes before they get committed to current, and preferably on more than the i386 platform. If we are going to be serious about supporting more hardware platforms, then we have to start treating them more seriously when major changes like this come along. If we can't get some broader testing of this done in the next few weeks, then the changes should probably wait until after 5.0. I believe that I read in an earlier thread that the archetecture-specific changes are minimal, and that majority of the changes are in high-level constructs in the kernel. Of course, I could be recalling this incorrectly, but I don't think I am... jim -- ET has one helluva sense of humor! He's always anal-probing right-wing schizos! _ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: Headsup! KSE Nay-sayers speak up!
Sean Chittenden wrote: I am ready to do my megga-commit to add the first stage of KSE-threading support to the kernel. If there is any argument as to the wisdom of this move, then this is the time to speak up! I have one system that I've been maintaining/updating since the 2.X days and I feel it's time to nuke it and start over. +1 for a non-smp system and SMP system. That said, I think the value of having both KSE and SMPng in 5.0 is HUGE and I think there is probably a large number of people that would be willing to endure kernel panics, dumps, etc. because the value (in terms of technological accomplishment and saleability in the corporate space) would be absolutely worth the bumpy road. -CURRENT isn't worth tracking unless the dumps, bugs, etc are all going toward both SMPng and KSE. Hey, anyone running -current without a tape drive attached with a daily dump schedule is either insane, a masochist, or both. Read my post from this morning about the mysterious filesystem corruption I had this morning... Kudos to Justin Gibbs for fixing EOM detection [let's get his scsi_sa.c patches committed ASAP]!!! If there are grave concerns about having KSE and SMPng in 5.X, then why not push back the release date? The value far outweighs the extra months needed to get it finished and out the door, but what do I know, I'm just a quiet kernel by standard making an observation. -sc Good idea. jim -- ET has one helluva sense of humor! He's always anal-probing right-wing schizos! _ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: Headsup! KSE Nay-sayers speak up!
: and preferably on more than the i386 platform. If we are going to : be serious about supporting more hardware platforms, then we have : to start treating them more seriously when major changes like this : come along. If we can't get some broader testing of this done in : the next few weeks, then the changes should probably wait until : after 5.0. : : :I believe that I read in an earlier thread that the archetecture-specific changes are :minimal, and that majority of the changes are :in high-level constructs in the kernel. Of course, I could be recalling this :incorrectly, but I don't think I am... : :jim Yes, this is correct. The assembly changes are just structural indirections for things that were broken off from the proc structure. The scheduler now messes with 'threads' rather then 'processes' for the most part. That part of the diff set is involved but straight forward. Julian also add KSTACK_PAGES to allow the kernel stack to be specified in a more controlled manner. Here is an excerpt so you can see what I mean: ... - - movlP_VMSPACE(%ecx), %edx + movlTD_PROC(%ecx), %eax + movlP_VMSPACE(%eax), %edx movlPCPU(CPUID), %eax btrl%eax, VM_PMAP+PM_ACTIVE(%edx) - movlP_ADDR(%ecx),%edx + movlTD_PCB(%ecx),%edx ... See? not much too it. -Matt To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: Headsup! KSE Nay-sayers speak up!
On Mon, 27 Aug 2001 15:34:14 -0500, Jim Bryant [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: FreeBSD is going to be left in the dust unless both the SMPng *AND* KSE projects are integrated into 5.0. I care about having a system that works well and does what I ask of it. What the Linux horde is doing is of little concern to me, and I suspect the same goes for a number of other long-time FreeBSDers. -GAWollman To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: Headsup! KSE Nay-sayers speak up!
Garance A Drosihn wrote: At 5:02 PM -0500 8/27/01, Jim Bryant wrote: Garance A Drosihn wrote: We can't just keep pushing back the release date because some very important enhancements could be made. It will ALWAYS be true that there are more very important enhancements on the horizon, and you can't keep running after those. You have to pick some point, and stick to that point, and ship at that point. As long as current is known to be in rapid flux, most I'm glad you support integration of KSE then... As I recall such threading was in the original design specs for 5.0, as released when work on 5.0 began. I'm disappointed that you completely misunderstood what I intended to say in the above. My point is that sometimes you have to stick to a ship date because you have to stick to that date, and not because you stick to some list of features that you'd like to see. The longer you let ship-dates slip, the longer you end up without a release-quality product. I to this day still think that was the reasoning behind the Thanksgiving [An American Holiday] release of 2.0-R. What a disaster! I know for a fact that MickeySoft has had this philosophy since at least Win-95.. What a disaster! Marketing people screaming about ship-dates are the prime cause of unstable software, IMHO. Software should be shipped when design goals are met, not before. Last I heard, 4.4-R is RSN... Why should there be a mad rush to release 5.0-R practically right after 4.4-R, especially if it's not yet ready for prime-time? At the rate things are going, even WITH KSE integrated, 5.0-R should be close to the currently projected release date. I forget... Wasn't the *ORIGINAL* release date for 5.0-R slated for early-2002? What happened to that? Marketing types step in? I think a lot of good work has gone into the current cut at KSE support, and I certainly hope it goes in. However, there are a number of other factors to consider. The right way to get KSE in 5.0 is to help do the work which is necessary for that to happen, and not to deliberately misquote people -- as you are pretty clearly doing in the above. What I explicitly said in the above message (and which you explicitly deleted) was that KSE should wait for a later release if the remaining work is not done. If you have some other opinion, that is fine, but do not reword *my* opinion to claim that I agree completely with your opinion. It was an asinine reply to an asinine comment, not a deliberate misquotation. Julian did a lot of good work, all he needs is a few more developers to help test that work. None of us need a thread arguing about release dates vs some goals set two years ago. Somehow I see the GOP using that same argument next year concerning the tax-scam... Medicare surplus wiped out, 9 billion into Social Security starting next week... oops, off topic... I agree with you to a point there. The design goals should be met. This isn't a commercial product, and thus I don't see that the argument that the release date should be set in stone is relevant, although it should be close to that which was originally specified. I support the integration of KSE in the sense that I intend to help test it (on a dual-CPU i386) sometime in the next week. I do not support a delay of 5.0. I can not test on Alpha, as I have no Alpha machines. Anyone who wants to prove their support for KSE in 5.0 should step up and offer to do some of the testing, etc. Actions will speak louder than any (misquoted) words. Again, I agree, except I still don't understand your dire need for a mad rush to have another Thanksgiving release a la 2.0-R. FreeBSD releases should be goal-oriented, not marketing-type oriented. 2.0-R left FreeBSD with reputation damage that took several years to clear up, I would have thought that some had learned from that stick to the release date experience. My first experience with -current sprang from that experience [for a while -current was more stable than -RELEASE, on freaking production systems]. It didn't take too long to get -RELEASE stable though, as I recall. Marketing types have a place: Selling RELEASED software and hardware... They should not be the end-all word on ship dates though. Hell, the Pentium 4 was a nice concept until... jim -- ET has one helluva sense of humor! He's always anal-probing right-wing schizos! _ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: Headsup! KSE Nay-sayers speak up!
Jim Bryant [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: FreeBSD is going to be left in the dust unless both the SMPng *AND* KSE proje cts are integrated into 5.0. Is there some reason why KSE couldn't be integrated ASAP *AFTER* 5.0 is released? [ Personally, I'd like to see it in 5.0, but, with all the qualms that people seem to have, I'm curious as to why it can't be integrated immediately after 5.0 is cut? This way, Julian's MFCs are reduced, and it gives people more time to pound on KSE. ] -- Darryl Okahata [EMAIL PROTECTED] DISCLAIMER: this message is the author's personal opinion and does not constitute the support, opinion, or policy of Agilent Technologies, or of the little green men that have been following him all day. To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: Headsup! KSE Nay-sayers speak up!
On Mon, Aug 27, 2001 at 10:39:23AM -0700, John Baldwin wrote: I wasn't in favor of KSE's in 5.0 at Usenix, but saw that I was in an obvious minority. I'm still in the minority and realize that and don't expect my opinions here to make any difference. I just wanted to voice my concerns. I find it distressing that you are the *only* person doing SMPng work, and people aren't giving your opinion a 10x weighting. -- -- David ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) Disclaimer: Not speaking for FreeBSD, just expressing my own opinion. To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: Headsup! KSE Nay-sayers speak up!
On Monday, 27 August 2001 at 18:43:13 -0700, David O'Brien wrote: On Mon, Aug 27, 2001 at 03:13:19PM -0500, Jim Bryant wrote: Count my vote as a go-for-it. Blah. You're vote doesn't mean jack in this. Be that as it may, this kind of message does mean something, but it's nothing positive. We've had enough nastiness in this area already. If you don't like what Jim's saying, why not just ignore him? Greg -- See complete headers for address and phone numbers To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: Headsup! KSE Nay-sayers speak up!
On Tue, Aug 28, 2001 at 11:47:30AM +0930, Greg Lehey wrote: Blah. You're vote doesn't mean jack in this. Be that as it may, this kind of message does mean something, but it's nothing positive. We've had enough nastiness in this area already. If you don't like what Jim's saying, why not just ignore him? Because I am also trying to make a very important point. And attempt to bring readers into some sense of reality. -- -- David ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: Headsup! KSE Nay-sayers speak up!
David O'Brien wrote: On Mon, Aug 27, 2001 at 03:13:19PM -0500, Jim Bryant wrote: Count my vote as a go-for-it. Blah. You're vote doesn't mean jack in this. Unless you are one actively working on the 5-CURRENT kernel (SMPng specifically), or are funding 5-CURRENT kernel development; you really don't have any right to say go for it. Don't write cheques your body can't cash. Quincy Jones's The Dude. Committing KSE now could easily get in the way of the one person doing SMPng work. Do you really want to jeopardize and slowdown that work? Actually, I'd like to see both projects proceed, but apparently what non-core contributers to FreeBSD think doesn't matter. Maybe all of the VOLUNTEER testers for -current should take your advice and go to NetBSD, OpenBSD, Linux, or open-Solaris... Maybe their opinions would be better received. As far as opinions are concerned, you have expressed yours, and I kinda hope it doesn't represent that of the entire core team. Opinions were asked for. Testers were asked for. I'm offering both. I don't think when Julian asked for opinions and testers that he was specifically asking core team members only. Julian, if this is not the case, please speak up, and accept my apology for butting in with my opinion, and my offer to take you up on your call for testers. All I did was write in support of getting some promised 5.0 items into 5.0, even offering to test them! Excuuse me! Shame on us peons for speaking our opinions! jim -- ET has one helluva sense of humor! He's always anal-probing right-wing schizos! _ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: Headsup! KSE Nay-sayers speak up!
On Mon, Aug 27, 2001 at 09:36:56PM -0500, Jim Bryant wrote: Actually, I'd like to see both projects proceed, but apparently what non-core contributers to FreeBSD think doesn't matter. It is an issue of effort and practicality. We are not talking about what should be the default window manager to give users maxium FreeBSD enjoyment. Setting up a nice GNOME or KDE default environment is about the same amount of work. And something that is orders upon orders of magnitude less time and complex than SMPng. If I expected you to send me a brand new dual AMD-Athlon machine that would be ridiculous. If I asked you to boot FreeBSD on it and send me the /var/run/dmesg.boot output and how long `make world' took, that would be reasonable. Expectations must be kept in perspective. Maybe all of the VOLUNTEER testers for -current should take your advice and go to NetBSD, OpenBSD, Linux, or open-Solaris... Maybe their opinions would be better received. I *MY* HO, if all someone does is whine w/o producing patches or good crashdumps, then *I* (only speaking for *me* here) don't mind that one bit. As far as opinions are concerned, you have expressed yours, and I kinda hope it doesn't represent that of the entire core team. Not it doesn't. That is why there was a disclaimer on my email and one on this one also. Opinions were asked for. Testers were asked for. I'm offering both. I don't think when Julian asked for opinions and testers that he was specifically asking core team members only. Julian, if this is not the case, please speak up, and accept my apology for butting in with my opinion, and my offer to take you up on your call for testers. Testing the KSE patch and saying it must go into 5.0 are two different things. -- -- David ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: Headsup! KSE Nay-sayers speak up!
Pleas guys, cut it out... Take a copy, run it, beat on it.. let me know if it fails.. thanks.. (p.s. I'll need to put a new patch up because -current has changed.. :-) To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: Headsup! KSE Nay-sayers speak up!
On 28-Aug-01 David O'Brien wrote: On Mon, Aug 27, 2001 at 10:39:23AM -0700, John Baldwin wrote: I wasn't in favor of KSE's in 5.0 at Usenix, but saw that I was in an obvious minority. I'm still in the minority and realize that and don't expect my opinions here to make any difference. I just wanted to voice my concerns. I find it distressing that you are the *only* person doing SMPng work, and people aren't giving your opinion a 10x weighting. I'm not the only person, and I only get one vote. It's FreeBSD, not jhbBSD. :) (jhbBSD would be fearful, indeed) -- John Baldwin [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/ PGP Key: http://www.baldwin.cx/~john/pgpkey.asc Power Users Use the Power to Serve! - http://www.FreeBSD.org/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: Headsup! KSE Nay-sayers speak up!
This project has always been more than just its core developers, whomever they might be at any one time (and if history has shown us anything, it's that it's a constantly changing cast). This means that anyone is free to chime in with their opinion on any project decision, just as the people doing the work being commented on are free to ignore or implement those suggestions as they see fit. What we don't get to do is violently squelch the opinions of anyone we disagree with and I'm somewhat appalled that you've felt compelled to go this far in your reply - it's really totally contrary to what this project really stands for and if you don't see that, it's time you took a much-needed vacation. If you want to disagree with someone's position, you can state your disagreement directly (I think this will jeopardize and slow down the SMPng work and I strongly disagree with Jim's suggestion) without calling into question their very right to express an opinion. Nobody's given you that kind of authority and no one likely ever will since censorship and an open development atmosphere are mutually exclusive concepts. For shame, David! - Jordan From: David O'Brien [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Headsup! KSE Nay-sayers speak up! Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2001 18:43:13 -0700 On Mon, Aug 27, 2001 at 03:13:19PM -0500, Jim Bryant wrote: Count my vote as a go-for-it. Blah. You're vote doesn't mean jack in this. Unless you are one actively working on the 5-CURRENT kernel (SMPng specifically), or are funding 5-CURRENT kernel development; you really don't have any right to say go for it. Don't write cheques your body can't cash. Quincy Jones's The Dude. Committing KSE now could easily get in the way of the one person doing SMPng work. Do you really want to jeopardize and slowdown that work? -- -- David ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) Disclaimer: Not speaking for FreeBSD, just expressing my own opinion. To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: Headsup! KSE Nay-sayers speak up!
At 6:59 PM -0500 8/27/01, Jim Bryant wrote: Garance A Drosihn wrote: What I explicitly said in the above message (and which you explicitly deleted) was that KSE should wait for a later release if the remaining work is not done. If you have some other opinion, that is fine, but do not reword *my* opinion to claim that I agree completely with your opinion. It was an asinine reply to an asinine comment, not a deliberate misquotation. Asinine replies seems to be a good description for everything you have said in all of these KSE threads. -- Garance Alistair Drosehn= [EMAIL PROTECTED] Senior Systems Programmer or [EMAIL PROTECTED] Rensselaer Polytechnic Instituteor [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: Headsup! KSE Nay-sayers speak up!
On Mon, Aug 27, 2001 at 09:34:06AM -0700, John Baldwin wrote: Just to get this out in the public: I for one think 5.x has enough changes in it and would like for KSE to be postponed to 6.0-current and 6.0-release. I know that I am in the minority on this, but wanted to say it anyways. You have my OVERWHELMING support for this position. We still have major problems in -CURRENT and if KSE code hit the tree I only see it leading to finger pointing on who broke what. -- -- David ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: Headsup! KSE Nay-sayers speak up!
On Mon, Aug 27, 2001 at 02:48:21PM -0700, Julian Elischer wrote: I don't WANT to commit without more testing and more support for the other platforms. However I need support from the people DOING those platforms to go further. For $500-$600 I can put you on a 500MHz 21164 Alpha. I've invested $2500 from my own pocket in Alpha hardware, so others with nice Bay Area saleries can too. :-) -- -- David ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: Headsup! KSE Nay-sayers speak up!
On Mon, Aug 27, 2001 at 03:13:19PM -0500, Jim Bryant wrote: Count my vote as a go-for-it. Blah. You're vote doesn't mean jack in this. Unless you are one actively working on the 5-CURRENT kernel (SMPng specifically), or are funding 5-CURRENT kernel development; you really don't have any right to say go for it. Don't write cheques your body can't cash. Quincy Jones's The Dude. Committing KSE now could easily get in the way of the one person doing SMPng work. Do you really want to jeopardize and slowdown that work? -- -- David ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) Disclaimer: Not speaking for FreeBSD, just expressing my own opinion. To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: Headsup! KSE Nay-sayers speak up!
On Mon, Aug 27, 2001 at 08:03:15PM -0700, John Baldwin wrote: I find it distressing that you are the *only* person doing SMPng work, and people aren't giving your opinion a 10x weighting. I'm not the only person, and I only get one vote. But you are the leading expert in SMPng, and thus any potential negative impact on the SMPng effort due to too much change at one time. It's FreeBSD, not jhbBSD. :) (jhbBSD would be fearful, indeed) Quite likely. :-) -- -- David ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: Headsup! KSE Nay-sayers speak up!
Tha actual impact on John will be minimal at this time. It'll be greater later. On Mon, 27 Aug 2001, David O'Brien wrote: On Mon, Aug 27, 2001 at 08:03:15PM -0700, John Baldwin wrote: I find it distressing that you are the *only* person doing SMPng work, and people aren't giving your opinion a 10x weighting. I'm not the only person, and I only get one vote. But you are the leading expert in SMPng, and thus any potential negative impact on the SMPng effort due to too much change at one time. It's FreeBSD, not jhbBSD. :) (jhbBSD would be fearful, indeed) Quite likely. :-) -- -- David ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: Headsup! KSE Nay-sayers speak up!
Matt Dillon wrote: Just for myself, I am seriously considering just throwing the whole lot (-current, that is) away and starting over from -stable. I spent 20 hours last weekend trying to unwind even part of the VM system from Giant, and failed utterly. I'd love to see the KSE stuff in -stable, I think it might even be a better fit. I am seriously considering this because I think we made a huge mistake throwing away the spl*() mechanism in -current, as a means of getting out from under the Giant lock paradigm quickly and partitioning the problem in a manner that allows subsystems to be worked on independantly. And I don't see any way to get it back. The spl*() mechanism already partitions the major subsystems that *need* to operate concurrently: I/O, interrupts, and the network stack. We would be able to work on major subsystems independantly and we would be able to debug things much more easily. -current as it currently stands is very nearly undebuggable. I've been thinking about this for the last few months... I am still thinking about it. I haven't made a decision yet. I think if KSEs go into -current I would stick with it, but if KSEs do not go into -current I don't see much of a point, -current will have wholely gone off in a direction that I don't believe in (rather then just mostly gone off). I'm similarly hesitant about -current; I didn't really like the SPL changes, which were capable of being converted to a lock per mask, and getting moderately parallel code rather cheaply... actually, I'm running my network stack almost totally without NETISR (see the Van Jacobsen papers), and expect to get rid of it completely in the very near future; this eliminates the real splimp induced contention remaining, making it safe to treat SPL's as masks of bit locks to hold. I'm also not too enamored about the interrupt threads idea, which I've argued before -- it has always boiled down to the fact it was available at the time, without respect to the actual merits of the approach. If I have to schedule, I'm already dead, when it comes to a receiver livelock, since I'll just be taking interrupts until I run out of mbufs, and then keep taking them forever, while dropping the packets that I no longer have mbufs for, as the clients retransmit me to death. FWIW, I've worked on several FreeBSD based embedded systems products (Whistle was sold to IBM on the basis of one of them), and have always used down rev code to ensure stability. I doubt very much if I will go to 5.0 when/if it becomes available, because the SMP code as is is not addressing anything but small numbers of CPUs, and seems to be ignoring issues that would lead to large numbers of CPUs and/or migration of processes to other nodes within a large cluster. I don't really have faith that it will run 80% faster on an 8-way system than it will on a 4-way, and I expect the lack of interrupt lock-down will make it not as sutable as a uniprocessor system for network processing when PCIX hits general release (8Mbit/S burst rate capable). Count me as another much more interested in the KSE work than the SMP work that has occurred so far (with a few exceptions, like some of the experimental code Alfred has discussed at work). I'd also like to see a port of the KSE stuff to -stable, most particularly if we are not going to see it in 5.0, but even then, it would be useful. I look at the SMPng stuff as research which has yet to prove itself, and would push that further off into the future, or just keep the HEAD as a research branch, and bring in KSE's on the 4.x BRANCH. Switching to using P4 lines Of Developement before the the SMPng started would sure have saved us a lot of pain here... -- Terry To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: Headsup! KSE Nay-sayers speak up!
Like I said... Count me in... Julian Elischer wrote: Pleas guys, cut it out... Take a copy, run it, beat on it.. let me know if it fails.. thanks.. (p.s. I'll need to put a new patch up because -current has changed.. :-) jim -- ET has one helluva sense of humor! He's always anal-probing right-wing schizos! _ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Headsup! KSE Nay-sayers speak up!
I am ready to do my megga-commit to add the first stage of KSE-threading support to the kernel. If there is any argument as to the wisdom of this move, then this is the time to speak up! At this stage a commit would break alpha and ia64 until they are patched. From experience I can say that it's not a horrific change to the machine dependent code so patches PRE commit would be welcome. -- ++ __ _ __ | __--_|\ Julian Elischer | \ U \/ / hard at work in | / \ [EMAIL PROTECTED] +--x USA\ a very strange | ( OZ)\___ ___ | country ! +- X_.---._/presently in San Francisco \_/ \\ v To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
