Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sat, 22 Dec 2007 20:03:08 -0800
From:      Alfred Perlstein <alfred@freebsd.org>
To:        David G Lawrence <dg@dglawrence.com>
Cc:        freebsd-net@freebsd.org, freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Packet loss every 30.999 seconds
Message-ID:  <20071223040308.GT16982@elvis.mu.org>
In-Reply-To: <20071222073236.GW25053@tnn.dglawrence.com>
References:  <D50B5BA8-5A80-4370-8F20-6B3A531C2E9B@eng.oar.net> <20071217102433.GQ25053@tnn.dglawrence.com> <CD187AD1-8712-418F-9F49-FA3407BA1AC7@eng.oar.net> <20071220011626.U928@besplex.bde.org> <814DB7A9-E64F-4BCA-A502-AB5A6E0297D3@eng.oar.net> <20071219171331.GH25053@tnn.dglawrence.com> <20071221200810.GY16982@elvis.mu.org> <20071221234347.GS25053@tnn.dglawrence.com> <20071222002432.GK16982@elvis.mu.org> <20071222073236.GW25053@tnn.dglawrence.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
* David G Lawrence <dg@dglawrence.com> [071221 23:31] wrote:
> > > > Can you use a placeholder vnode as a place to restart the scan?
> > > > you might have to mark it special so that other threads/things
> > > > (getnewvnode()?) don't molest it, but it can provide for a convenient
> > > > restart point.
> > > 
> > >    That was one of the solutions that I considered and rejected since it
> > > would significantly increase the overhead of the loop.
> > >    The solution provided by Kostik Belousov that uses uio_yield looks like
> > > a find solution. I intend to try it out on some servers RSN.
> > 
> > Out of curiosity's sake, why would it make the loop slower?  one
> > would only add the placeholder when yielding, not for every iteration.
> 
>    Actually, I misread your suggestion and was thinking marker flag,
> rather than placeholder vnode. Sorry about that. The current code
> actually already uses a marker vnode. It is hidden and obfuscated in
> the MNT_VNODE_FOREACH macro, further hidden in the __mnt_vnode_first/next
> functions, so it should be safe from vnode reclaimation/free problems.

That level of obscuring is a bit worrysome.

Yes, I did mean placeholder vnode.

Even so, is it of utility or not?

Or is it already being used and I'm missing something and should
just "utsl" at this point?

-- 
- Alfred Perlstein



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20071223040308.GT16982>