Bob Beck wrote:
My conern is what is actually behind your possible panic. We (including myself)
have been introducing and removing some dlg inspired breakage at the same time
here so it depends what you are doing.
Please continue and let me know what you see.
I redid the tests on my 2G laptop
On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 04:34:41PM -0700, Bob Beck wrote:
My conern is what is actually behind your possible panic. We (including
myself)
have been introducing and removing some dlg inspired breakage at the same
time
here so it depends what you are doing.
Please continue and let me know what
Bob Beck wrote:
Try this.
We used to do this, but perhaps prematurely. I've now killed several of
the nfs bugs this used to tickle.
This lets you make more effective use of your larger buffer cache, if
you are using it for lots of small files (like /usr/src, and the like)
since you can
My conern is what is actually behind your possible panic. We (including myself)
have been introducing and removing some dlg inspired breakage at the same time
here so it depends what you are doing.
Please continue and let me know what you see.
2010/1/12 Tobias Ulmer tobi...@tmux.org:
On Tue,
On Sat, Jan 09, 2010 at 04:05:13AM -0700, Bob Beck wrote:
Try this.
Box locked up under make clean while building ports, hdd led still on.
Last time i've checked it had about 84000 vnodes, which gave a very
nice (subjective) speedup since no read access gets to the disk,
(almost) ever.
Hmm
any chance you can get into ddb from that and get me a traceback tobias?
Potentially there is a vnode sitting on something in the stack there
that I would be very interested
in a show vnode from ddb on. I will also see if I can do anything
here to see that as well..
2010/1/10 Tobias
@@ -350,7 +359,7 @@
* referencing buffers.
*/
toggle ^= 1;
- if (numvnodes 2 * maxvnodes)
+ if (numvnodes / 2 maxvnodes)
toggle = 0;
+ if ((numvnodes 1) maxvnodes)
slightly better?
I find your lack of faith in the compiler disturbing.
On Sat, Jan 09, 2010 at 04:05:13AM -0700, Bob Beck wrote:
[dd]
-Bob
Index: kern/vfs_subr.c
===
RCS file: /cvs/src/sys/kern/vfs_subr.c,v
retrieving revision 1.184
diff -u -r1.184 vfs_subr.c
@@ -350,7 +359,7 @@
*
On Saturday, January 9, 2010, Joerg Sonnenberger
jo...@britannica.bec.de wrote:
On Sat, Jan 09, 2010 at 08:15:20PM +, Grumpy wrote:
@@ -350,7 +359,7 @@
* referencing buffers.
*/
toggle ^= 1;
- if (numvnodes 2 * maxvnodes)
+ if (numvnodes / 2 maxvnodes)
On Sat, Jan 09, 2010 at 02:41:02PM -0800, Philip Guenther wrote:
I find your lack of faith in the compiler disturbing.
I find your lack of type checking before trolling disturbing.
stares at the code
Ummm, what?
AFAICT, the only difference between the two variants that I can see is
On Sat, Jan 9, 2010 at 6:22 PM, Joerg Sonnenberger
jo...@britannica.bec.de wrote:
You have analysed the situation correctly. The problem is that the
compiler does not know that the signed numvnodes is never negative, so
it creates different code. E.g. on AMD64 it is 6 instructions for the
On Sat, Jan 09, 2010 at 06:35:45PM -0500, Ted Unangst wrote:
On Sat, Jan 9, 2010 at 6:22 PM, Joerg Sonnenberger
jo...@britannica.bec.de wrote:
You have analysed the situation correctly. The problem is that the
compiler does not know that the signed numvnodes is never negative, so
it
Good god people. just test the fscking diff and stop the chestbeating
and cockpulling already.
13 matches
Mail list logo
