From owner-freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Fri Mar 18 19:01:42 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2B893AD42D6 for ; Fri, 18 Mar 2016 19:01:42 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from stas@FreeBSD.org) Received: from mx0.deglitch.com (mx0.deglitch.com [IPv6:2a00:13c0:63:7194:1::3]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DB9A819A8; Fri, 18 Mar 2016 19:01:41 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from stas@FreeBSD.org) Received: from [IPv6:2620:10d:c082:1803:9c65:ebd8:7cd2:7e46] (unknown [IPv6:2620:10d:c090:200::f:9a2b]) by mx0.deglitch.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 704348FC0B; Fri, 18 Mar 2016 12:01:39 -0700 (PDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 9.2 \(3112\)) Subject: Re: Peformance issues with r278325 From: Stanislav Sedov In-Reply-To: <8EE51E0E-41F4-4B5A-A755-B58E8E1D1776@FreeBSD.org> Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2016 12:01:37 -0700 Cc: Adrian Chadd , Konstantin Belousov , "freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <8403291.NqUNo0Qq5W@ralph.baldwin.cx> <3277812.DVsZx4uMun@ralph.baldwin.cx> <8EE51E0E-41F4-4B5A-A755-B58E8E1D1776@FreeBSD.org> To: John Baldwin X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3112) X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2016 19:01:42 -0000 > On Mar 18, 2016, at 11:16 AM, Stanislav Sedov = wrote: >=20 > FWIW we are currently testing the delay '1' change. Unfortunately, = the test is > not easy to repeat (we didn't find a synthetic one yet that results in = the same > outcome), so it does take more time that I would like. Will follow up = with the=20 > results. >=20 > We did try HEAD as well a while ago, and although it exhibited the = same pattern. > However it did not utilize the x2apic unfortunately, as it does seem = to be disables > in the BIOS (FreeBSD reports it being disables in the DMAR table). >=20 > Thanks for looking into it! >=20 Replying to my own message. The `delay 1` test was a success, we were not able to reproduce the same = issues as we had with a 5us delay in that loop. So perhaps we should commit = the delay change into stable/10 instead of reverting the code altogether (I assume = the original change was done to solve a real issue?). -- Stanislav Sedov ST4096-RIPE