Hans Thats great, could you please open a project branch that we can look at it in too?
I would very much appreciate that. Sometimes I like to look at the whole code with it all in place (not just patches) and a project branch really helps with that. R > On Jan 22, 2015, at 3:39 AM, Hans Petter Selasky <h...@selasky.org> wrote: > > On 01/22/15 09:10, Konstantin Belousov wrote: >> On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 08:14:26AM +0100, Hans Petter Selasky wrote: >>> On 01/22/15 06:26, Warner Losh wrote: >>> > >>>>> The code simply needs an update. It is not broken in any ways - right? If >>>>> it is not broken, fixing it is not that urgent. >>>> >>>> Radically changing the performance characteristics is breaking the code. >>>> Performance regression in the TCP stack is urgent to fix. >> >>> Not being able to enumerate what all the consumers are that use this and >>> provide an analysis about why they aren?t important to fix is a bug in >>> your process, and in your interaction with the project. We simply do not >>> operate that way. >> Right, I completely agree with this statement. >> >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> My plan is to work out a patch for the TCP stack today, which only >>> change the callout_init() call or its function. This should not need any >>> particular review. I'll let adrian test and review, because I think he >>> is closer to me timezone wise and you're standing on my head saying its >>> urgent. If he is still not happy, I can back my change out. Else it >>> remains in -current AS-IS. >> TCP regresssion was noted, so it is brought in front. There is nothing >> else which makes TCP issue different from other (hidden) issues. >> >> =========================== >>> MFC to 10-stable I can delay for sure until >>> all issues you report to me are fixed. >> =========================== >> >> Sigh, you still do not understand. It is your duty to identify all pieces >> which break after your change. After that, we can argue whether each of >> them is critical or not to allow the migration. But this must have been >> done before the KPI change hit the tree. >> > > Hi, > > Are you saying that pieces of code that runs completely unlocked using > "volatile" as only synchronization mechanism is better than what I would call > a temporary and hopefully short TCP stack performance loss? > > I don't understand? How frequently do you reboot your boxes? Maybe one every > day? And you don't care? > > --HPS > > > ------------------------------ Randall Stewart 803-317-4952 (cell) _______________________________________________ svn-src-all@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/svn-src-all To unsubscribe, send any mail to "svn-src-all-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
