On Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 12:18 AM, Roy Marples <r...@marples.name> wrote: > On 17/02/2016 01:46, Roy Marples wrote: >> Patch attached to solve change from a priority array into a bit mask >> approach where we swallow the whole queue in a softint. > > I did the same tests as noted in PR 50602 - put the system under load by > building clang from src and qt5 from pkgsrc at the same time, both with > -j3 on my Core2 @2.4Ghz dev machine. > The load was measured at about 9 by top, the machine itself was pretty > un-useable. > > It also has a wm(4) interface, which the reporter had. > Also an iwn(4) interface. > Toggling both as fast as possible - my daughter power cycled the AP > while I unplugged / replugged the ethernet cable. > > Doing this for about 10 minutes resulted in no lossage reported with my > patch and like state transitions happened perfectly.
Good. > > I would imagine any lossage would occur as a result of a driver or > hardware defect, where more important information is likely found on the > console as well. IIUC amd64/i386 have the fast softint facility and it tries to schedule a softint just after hwintr finishes, and so more than one events are unlikely to come before the softint starts? Please someone correct me if my guess is wrong. ozaki-r
